[California Energy Commission Letterhead]




Implementation of Renewables ) Docket No. 03-RPS-1078
Portfolio Standard Legislation (Public ) RPS Proceeding
Utilities Code Sections 381, 383.5, )
399.11 through 399.15, and 445; [SB )
1038], [SB 1078]) )


Implementation of Renewables ) Docket No. 02-REN-1038
Investment Plan Legislation (Public ) Renewable Energy Program:
Utilities Code sections 381, 383.5, and ) Notice of Renewables Committee
445 [SB 1038]) ) Hearing
_______________________________________ )


The California Energy Commissions Renewables Committee will conduct a hearing to solicit input on proposed guidelines for implementing Californias Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS). Commissioner John L. Geesman is the Presiding Member and Commissioner James D. Boyd is the Associate Member.

10 a.m.
1516 Ninth Street
First Floor, Hearing Room A
Sacramento, California
(Wheelchair Accessible)

Audio from this hearing will be broadcast over the Internet.
For details about how to listen in, go to: www.energy.ca.gov/realaudio/

Purpose of the Hearing

The Committee seeks input from interested parties on the following guidebooks relating to the Energy Commissions RPS Proceeding and Renewable Energy Program.

  1. Renewables Portfolio Standard Eligibility Guidebook - This guidebook describes the proposed eligibility requirements and process for certifying renewable resources as eligible for Californias Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) and Supplemental Energy Payments (SEPs). It also describes how the Energy Commission will track and verify compliance with the RPS using an interim tracking process.

  2. New Renewable Facilities Program Guidebook - This document describes how to qualify for and receive SEPs from the New Renewable Facilities Program element of the Energy Commissions Renewable Energy Program.

  3. Overall Program Guidebook for the Renewable Energy Program - This document was adopted in February 2003 to govern the Renewable Energy Program, and has been revised to include administration of the RPS.

The Committee specifically encourages parties to provide comments relating to the list of outstanding issues enclosed as Attachment A.

The draft guidebooks were developed as part of an ongoing collaborative process between the Energy Commission and the California Public Utilities Commission.The proposed requirements in these draft guidebooks are based on the law as set forth in Senate Bill 1038 (SB 1038, Sher, Statutes of 2002, Chapter 515) and Senate Bill 1078 (SB 1078, Sher, Statutes of 2002, Chapter 516) and revised under Senate Bill 183 (Chapter 666, Statutes of 2003, Sher) and Senate Bill 67 (Chapter 731, Statutes of 2003, Bowen), the Renewables Portfolio Standard Decision on Phase 1 Implementation Issues (publication number 500-03-023F), the Renewables Portfolio Standard Decision on Phase 2 Implementation Issues (publication number 500-03-049F), staff analysis, advice from the Energy Commissions technical support contractor, and public input.

The guidebooks are available on the Energy Commissions website at:


Hard copies of the guidebooks may be obtained by calling Janet Preis at (916) 654-4524.

After the hearing, the Committee will finalize the guidebooks based on written and verbal comments received at the hearing, and then present the guidebooks to the Energy Commission for adoption at a Business Meeting.Public Utilities Code section 383.5(h)(1) authorizes the Energy Commission to adopt guidelines to implement portions of the RPS under SB 1078 and SB 1038.

This notice is being distributed to the service lists for the RPS Proceeding (Docket No. 03-RPS-1078) and the Renewable Energy Program (Docket No. 02-REN-1038) because it deals with matters related to both proceedings.

Written Comments

The Energy Commission encourages members of the public to submit written comments in advance of the hearing. An original and 11 copies of any comments filed by mail or in person should be provided to the Energy Commissions Docket Unit. Parties may also file a single copy electronically with the Dockets Office and follow up with an original copy by mail. The Committee encourages comments by e-mail so that comments may be posted on the RPS proceeding web page. If you are providing written comments at the hearing, please make an additional 50 copies available at the beginning of the hearing. Please send or deliver written materials to:

California Energy Commission
Re: Docket No. 03-RPS-1078
and Docket No. 02-REN-1038
Docket Unit, MS-4
1516 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814-5504

All written materials filed with the Docket Unit will become part of the public record in this proceeding. Written comments will be accepted until close of business Monday, February 9, 2004.

Public Participation

The Energy Commissions Public Adviser, Margret J. Kim, provides the public assistance in participating in Energy Commission activities. If you would like information on how to participate in this workshop, please contact the Public Advisers Office by phone at (916) 654-4489 or toll free at (800) 822-6228, by FAX at (916) 654-4493, or by e-mail at [pao@energy.state.ca.us]. If you have a disability and require assistance to participate in this workshop, please contact Lou Quiroz at (916) 654-5146 at least five days in advance.

Members of the public may also monitor the RPS proceeding and obtain information on the Renewable Energy Program through the Energy Commissions website at:


Members of the public who have technical questions regarding this notice may contact Tim Tutt, Technical Director of the Renewable Energy Program by phone at (916) 654-4590 or by e-mail at [ttutt@energy.state.ca.us]. News media should direct inquiries to Claudia Chandler, Assistant Director, at (916) 654-4989 or by e-mail at [energia@energy.ca.gov].

Date:January 23, 2004


Commissioner and Presiding Member
Renewables Committee

Commissioner and Associate Member
Renewables Committee



Attachment A
Topics on which the Renewables Committee
Specifically Seeks Public Comment

Below is a list of recommendations that the Committee wishes to bring to the attention of the public for comment. In some cases, this list identifies provisions in the Guidebooks that go into a level of detail that was not previously identified in the Phase 1 or Phase 2 Decisions (the Renewables Portfolio Standard: Decision on Phase 1 Implementation issues, publication number 500-03-023F, and the Renewables Portfolio Standard: Decision on Phase 2 Implementation issues, publication number 500-03-049F). In other cases, the Committee is seeking further input on issues that were previously identified in the Decisions but which require further deliberation.

Eligibility For Californias Renewables Portfolio Standard Guidebook

Certification Process:

  1. The Committee proposes the following timeline and process for certification of facilities that qualify for the RPS or that qualify for the RPS and SEPs. The Committee invites comments on whether this timeline and process effectively supports RPS procurement and efficient program administration, or if modifications should be made.

    1. The Committee anticipates a 10-day turn around for certification or pre-certification requests that do not require supplemental information, and a 30-day turnaround for facilities that do require supplemental information (biomass, geothermal, hydropower, and municipal solid waste conversion facilities).

    2. The Committee proposes that applicants be able to petition the Committee and the Energy Commission for reconsideration if they disagree with a determination of certification or pre-certification. This petition process is described in the Overall Guidelines for the Renewable Energy Program. As described in the Overall Guidelines, the Committee expects to issue decisions on petitions for reconsideration within 45 days of receipt of a complete petition.

    3. The Committee proposes that electricity procured by an IOU prior to a facilitys certification may count towards the RPS obligation once the facility becomes certified and demonstrates that it was eligible at the time of the procurement. For example, procurement in 2001 through 2003 may count towards an IOUs RPS obligation even though facilities were not RPS certified at the time of procurement. Until the facility is certified, however, the electricity will not be considered eligible and will not be counted towards meeting an RPS obligation. This applies to all facilities regardless of whether or not they previously registered with the Energy Commissions Renewable Energy Program.
  1. The Committee invites comments on how to provide more specificity to guide the Energy Commissions determination that a facility meets the repower definition.

  2. In particular, if an applicant chooses the Replacement Value Methodology to show that its facility meets the definition of repower, the Committee proposes that the analysis should be conducted by, "an accountant in good standing with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants or a member in good standing and certified as an Internal Auditor with the Institute of Internal Audits." The Committee invites comments on this provision.

  3. Biomass:
  4. Senate Bill 183 (SB 183, Chapter 666, Statutes of 2003, Sher), as codified in Public Resources Code 25748, requires the Energy Commission to, "…identify the types and quantities of biomass fuels used by facilities receiving funds pursuant to Section 45743 and their impacts on improving air quality." To meet this requirement, any invoice for SEPs for electricity generated by a biomass facility must include backup material describing the biomass supply as follows:the date(s) of delivery, the job number, number of truckloads, type of biomass, tons of biomass, the air district from which the biomass originated, and an attestation that the biomass fuel continues to meet the RPS eligibility standards. This information is consistent with what is required for biomass facilities participating in the Energy Commissions Agricultural Biomass-to-Energy Program established by Senate Bill 704 (Chapter 480, Statues of 2003, Florez).

  5. Hydro:
  6. The Committee invites comments on the proposed requirement that a hydro facility would NOT be eligible for the RPS if its operation requires a new or increased appropriation or diversion of water that requires a new or revised permit from the State Water Resources Control Board.

  7. The Committee recommends that RPS eligible facilities must not exceed 30 MW in total even if an applicant claims that only a portion of the facility is repowered or new. Thus, any addition to a facility that is 30 MW or larger would not be eligible, nor would a repower project that adds 5 MW to a 26 MW facility qualify for RPS eligibility.

  8. MSW Conversion:
  9. The Committee recommends that an applicant show that its facility has a Conversion Technology Facility Permit with the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) as a pre-requisite for certification as a Renewable Supplier Eligible for the RPS and SEPs. To become pre-certified, the applicant must submit to the Energy Commission the information needed to apply for a Conversion Technology Facility Permit with the CIWMB. Further, if the permit is denied or repealed, the Energy Commission would revoke the facilitys certification or pre-certification for RPS/SEP eligibility.

  10. SB 67 and SB 183:
  11. SB 183 and Senate Bill 67 (SB 67, Chapter 731, Statutes of 2003, Bowen), became law on October 2, 2003 and October 8, 2003, respectively.SB 183 and SB 67 establish new RPS eligibility requirements for out-of-state renewable power. In addition, SB 183 recasts the provisions of Public Utilities Code sections 383.5 and 445 into Public Resources Code sections 25740 through 25751.The Committee invites comments on how the statutory changes imposed by SB 183 and SB 67 in should be reflected in the guidelines.

  12. In particular, the Committee invites comment on whether RPS eligible procurement must be delivered in-state. SB 67 may be construed as not imposing an in-state deliverability requirement for generation to qualify as eligible for the RPS. To be consistent with the Phase 1 Decision and the current policy that energy may not be unbundled with its associated Renewable Energy Credits to qualify for the RPS, however, the Committee proposes that facilities which qualify for RPS certification pursuant to SB 67 should be required to deliver energy in-state. Consequently, any generation procured for the RPS from an RPS eligible facility located out of state must be delivered to an in-state electricity delivery hub.

  13. The Committee also invites comment on whether the Energy Commission should develop a listing of contract types with out-of-state generators that are allowable and those that are not. For example, should the only allowable contract type for an out-of-state generator be a unit-contingent contract that provides for complete, unit-specific transmission, delivery, and scheduling into California with no REC unbundling?

  14. Hybrid Technologies and Biodiesel:
  15. As explained in the Commissions Phase I Decision, the Commission has required in the past that renewable facilities use no more than 25 percent fossil fuels if they wish to receive funding from the Existing Renewable Resources Account and New Renewable Resources Accounts. Conversely, in the past the Energy Commission allowed a facility to use up to 25 percent fossil fuel and to count all its generation in total as renewable.

    This 25 percent limitation was first imposed by SB 90, which required participating renewable facilities to be qualifying facilities under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA), and prohibited such facilities from using a conventional power source, as defined in Public Utilities Code § 2805.However, in SB 1038, the Legislature omitted this requirement for renewable facilities seeking post-2002 funding.Since the 25 percent limitation is no longer a statutory requirement, and because it was originally directed toward eligibility for funding rather than for the RPS, the Committee seeks input on whether this limitation should be applied to eligible biodiesel and hybrid renewable energy systems going forward.

  16. As an alternative to the 25 percent limitation described above, the Committee seeks comments on whether the Energy Commission should allow any metered, eligible renewable generation to qualify for the RPS.

    • The Committee is considering allowing the portion of a facility which separately meters electricity production from renewable fuels to be certified for the RPS.For example, if a facility co-fires landfill gas and natural gas, any use of landfill gas that is separately metered may become certified as a separate facility and the renewable electricity production may count as RPS or RPS/SEP eligible.

    • The Committee specifically invites comments on whether a certified new biomass facility should be allowed to meet the qualification for hybrid technologies given the language in SB 1078 stating that "fuel utilization is limited" to a variety of restrictions. For example, if a facility operated on 10 percent RPS/SEP eligible biomass and 90 percent coal, should the renewable portion of electricity generation be metered as a separate facility to be considered eligible for the RPS and SEPs?

    • Pumped storage: The Committee proposes allowing pumped storage hydro to qualify for the RPS to the extent that: 1) the facility meets the eligibility requirements for small hydro, and 2) the electricity used to pump the water qualifies as RPS eligible.
    Certification Updates:
  1. In the Phase 2 Decision, the Energy Commission decided, "Certification must be renewed every year to capture any facility changes and to confirm that all certified renewable energy resources remain eligible for the RPS." The Committee proposes conducting such updates every two years and invites comments on this modification to the Decision.

  2. Interim Generation Tracking System:
  3. The Committee proposes verifying the data submitted through the interim generation tracking system with data from the Energy Information Administration, the Energy Commissions Renewable Energy Program, and the Energy Commissions Electricity Analysis Office. These databases each use different facility identification numbering systems, and in many case report different totals for generation. The Committee invites comments on how to verify the data submitted in the interim until an electronic tracking system is operational.

  4. The Committee proposes that the CPUC direct the IOUs to report their procurement of renewable electricity in year 2003 on April 1, 2004. Procurement in year 2004 should be reported April 1, 2005. The Energy Commission requests that the IOUs be directed to submit the information on form CEC-RPS-Track which is consistent with the form used to collect data on baseline procurement. The Committee invites comments on the data request and the date the data should be filed with the Energy Commission.

  5. New Renewable Facilities Program Guidebook
  6. SB 1038 includes a provision in awarding SEP funding, the Energy Commission, "mayprovide preference to projects that provide tangible demonstrable benefits to communities with a plurality of minority or low-income populations."The Committee recommends that this goal be evaluated on a case-by-case basis as projects apply for SEPs. Based upon initial experience, specific protocols may be added in the future.

  7. Funding Allocation/ Caps:
  8. Consistent with the Phase 2 decision, the Committee is not recommending a specific allocation for IOUs versus ESPs/CCAs.

  9. SB 1038 allows the Energy Commission to establish payment caps on SEPs. The Committee believes that, to ensure the most efficient management of state funds, it may become necessary to impose a cap on the cents per kilowatt-hour SEP, on funding per project, or the total available PGC funds in a given IOU solicitation.However, the Committee is not proposing to establish any caps in advance, but instead intends to evaluate the bids received in each solicitation and determine the need for caps at that time, prior to notifying the IOUs and selected bidders of the potential SEP for each bidder.If caps are determined to be necessary, they will be established during the Energy Commissions 30-day evaluation period to determine the potential PGC award per winning bidder, prior to making any conditional funding awards.The Committee does not propose establishing caps after it makes conditional funding awards, and does not propose setting funding caps on projects that have pre-existing contracts.The Committee invites parties to comment on these issues.