Intervenor must satisfy intervenor compensation requirements set forth in Pub. Util. Code §§ 1801-1812: Intervenor CPUC Verification Timely filing of notice of intent to claim compensation (NOI) (§ 1804(a)): 1. Date of Prehearing Conference: 2/25/14 in R.13-12-010 R.13-12-010 2. Other specified date for NOI: NOI in R.13-12-010 accepted in R.16-02-007 R.13-12-010 3. Date NOI filed: 3/27/2014 (for R.13-12-010) 9/8/2014 (Amended for R.1312-010) Verified 4. Was the NOI timely filed? Yes Showing of eligible customer status (§ 1802(b) or eligible local government entity status (§§ 1802(d), 1802.4): 5. Based on ALJ ruling issued in proceeding number: R.13-12-010 Verified 6. Date of ALJ ruling: 9/26/2014 Verified 7. Based on another CPUC determination (specify): R.16-02-007 OIR 2/11/2016 and ALJ email 7/10/2016 Verified 8. Has the Intervenor demonstrated customer status or eligible government entity status? Yes Showing of “significant financial hardship” (§1802(h) or §1803.1(b)): 9. Based on ALJ ruling issued in proceeding number: R.13-12-010 Verified 10. Date of ALJ ruling: 6 9/26/2014 Verified 11. Based on another CPUC determination (specify): As R.16-02-007 OIR 2/11/2016 and ALJ email 7/10/2016 Verified 12 Has the Intervenor demonstrated significant financial hardship? Yes Timely request for compensation (§ 1804(c)):
Rulemaking proceedings, etc. - must be directed to ensure that there be no more new fossil fueled power generation permitted and that existing plants are phased out as base load.” (POC Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy Actions at p. 10; See also POC Comment On Ruling Of Assigned Commissioner And Administrative Law Judge Requesting Comments On Disadvantaged Communities And Other Aspects Of Senate Bill 350 at pp. 2-4.) “First and foremost, the policy objective for this proceeding – in particular the reduction of greenhouse gases and improvement of disadvantaged communities – cannot be achieved without a phase out of fossil fuel power plants. (POC Reply Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy Actions at p. 3.) “A decrease in the use of fossil fuel power plants is the most important part of improving disadvantaged communities and failure to sufficiently address the fossil fuel power plant fleet is a failure to those suffering from the harm to their health and quality of life that those living in the shadow of gas power plants suffer.” (POC Reply Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related “LSE plans must describe policies and evaluation criteria to apply in planning and deciding when to retire, cancel, or not renew contracts for existing gas generation units that emit air pollutants that impact disadvantaged communities.” (Decision at p. 70.) “Finally, both because of the clear nexus between natural gas generation and emissions in disadvantaged communities within the electric sector and because a portfolio that includes new gas plant procurement would be inconsistent with the portfolio we are adopting in this decision (the Reference System Portfolio, discussed further in Section 8 below), we will require that any LSE proposing to develop new natural gas resources or re-contract with existing natural gas resources in their IRP for a term of five years or more, regardless of whether it is located in a disadvantaged community, make a showing as to why another lower-emitting or preferably zero-emitting resource could not reasonably meet the need identified. . .” (Decision at p. 70; See also Decision at Conclusion of Law 8.)
Commission Policy Actions at pp. 4-5.) “Any further examination of these issues will be with sensitivity to the aspects of natural gas generation, including impacts on disadvantaged communities and air quality implications.” (Decision at p. 145.) Issue A: Disadvantaged Communities In multiple comments and at the All Party Meeting, POC advocated for the Commission for stronger and more proactive actions in regards to addressing disadvantaged communities, in particular directing LSEs to take a closer look at environmental impacts on those living in the disadvantaged communities with gas power plants instead of merely collecting information on disadvantaged communities. “LSE must quantitatively demonstrate that it is meeting requirements of diversity, sustainability, and resilience.” (POC Comment On Ruling Of Assigned Commissioner And Administrative Law Judge Requesting Comments On Disadvantaged Communities And Other Aspects Of Senate Bill 350 at p. 6.) “The goal of minimizing air pollutants and GHG emissions with “Comments focused on a number of issues, including defining the term “disadvantaged community,” possible requirements and metrics to address impacts on disadvantaged communities, consequences of failing to demonstrate meeting a requirement, consideration of disadvantaged communities in procurement-related activities, and coordination between agencies and among Commission proceedings on issues that impact disadvantaged communities.” (Decision at p. 59.) “We also appreciate a number of parties’ suggestions for improving the disadvantaged communities’ analysis in IRP, which we will consider in the next round.” (Decision at p. 70.) “Once procurement activities are undertaken, we expect that the LSEs will procure the most effective resources within the Verified specific
assumptions and otherwise improve the model. “There are many disputed issues of material facts that have been raised by POC and other parties throughout this proceeding regarding assumptions made in the model and the extent to which the model reflects realistic conditions. . . .For example, there are disputed issues of material fact regarding the question of the statutorily required increase in energy efficiency as well as the price, availability, and time for procurement of wind, solar, and storage.” (POC Motion for Evidentiary Hearings at p. 16.) POC argued against use 1.5 multiplier instead of doubling of energy efficiency, assumptions of resources costs, treatment of DER, and other issues with the RESOLVE model assumptions and analysis. (See POC Motion for Evidentiary Hearings; POC Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy; POC Reply Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy; POC Comments on the Proposed Decision.) “[The RESOLVE model] does not accurately capture the cost of key resources – solar, wind, and storage.” (POC Comment On from the CEC should be doubled.” (Decision at p. 45.) “On the supply side, the main concern was about the assumption that existing resources, both fossil-fueled and renewable, would be recontracted and available throughout the planning horizon to 2030. This view was shared by numerous parties to some degree, including…POC.” (Decision at p. 46.) “Numerous parties commented on the manner in which resource costs are treated in RESOLVE…POC do[es] not believe that the TRC approach is appropriate for BTM PV and/or storage…For storage costs, some parties felt they were assumed to be too low (National Grid), while other parties believed they were too high (CESA). Vote Solar and POC felt that solar PV cost estimates were too high.” (Decision at p. 47.) “With respect to DERs, because most are not optimized intrinsically in the RESOLVE model, additional work is needed to be able to predict their value with specificity.” (Decision at p. 39.)
at this point.” (POC Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy at p. 19.) RPS compliance requirements were not raised in the Decision: “All LSEs should be required to continue to comply with the existing energy efficiency, RPS, and resource adequacy requirements.” (Decision at Conclusion of Law 21.) Issue E: Procurement POC argued in multiple comments and at the All Party Meeting that there should not be any early procurement of out-of-state wind. The Decision reflects POC’s input. “The Proposed Reference System Plan portfolio need not and should not include new out-of-state resources and should not focus on utility scale generation. A shift away from in-state resources in favor of out-of-state resources deprives the California and local economies, especially those in disadvantaged communities, from the economic development of construction and operation of new local, distributed carbon-zero energy infrastructures.” (POC Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy at p. 3.) “The RESOLVE model is supposed to inform that Proposed Reference System Plan. Making a special exception to this planning process for early procurement of utility scale generation, especially “POC argued that there is no need to pursue out-of-state wind when all of the necessary benefits can be achieved with a diverse portfolio of California resources.” (Decision at p. 77.) The Decision adopts a Reference System Portfolio that does not include out-of-state wind. (Decision at pp. 77-91; Decision at Conclusions of Law 18 and 19.) “For this cycle, we are satisfied that we do not need to direct immediate activity to support additional geothermal development, pumped hydro storage development, or wind development, outside of what would naturally occur during LSE-specific procurement activities.” (Decision at p. 78.) Verified
outofstate wind, prior to the development of and in exception to the recommended portfolio and approval of IRPs is anathema to this entire process.” (POC Reply Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy at p. 6.) “Procurement of out of state wind is more costly, more detrimental to the environment, and will cause greater harm to disadvantaged communities than other options such as energy efficiency, demand response, and distributed renewable generation.” (POC Comments on the Proposed Decision at p. 12.) Issue E: Procurement POC advocated throughout the proceeding in multiple comments and at the All Party Meeting against the use of early procurement of renewables as a means to capture federal tax credits. The Decision reflects POC’s input. “Procurement should be based on meeting policy targets, demonstration of need, integrated and diverse resource portfolio planning, and corrected projections of future costs. There should be no rush to procure solely based upon the tax credit schedule if this means a failure to produce a viable model.” (POC Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy at p. 12.) “POC agreed that there is no near-term need for additional renewable energy in IOU portfolios in the near future, and therefore early procurement requirements should not be imposed. They argued that the ITC and PTC should not drive procurement.” (Decision at p. 97.) “Despite the potential for cost savings for ratepayers identified by Commission staff in their optimal portfolio analysis using RESOLVE, we are not persuaded of the need to order near-term procurement of additional renewables at this point in time.” (Decision at p. 98.) Verified
credit from 30% to 10%. Utility scale solar has decreased in price by 75% in less than a decade. A reduction of only 20% in cost over the next several years, a reasonable assumption considering the historic solar cost decline trend, would fully compensate for the reduced tax credit.” (POC Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy at pp. 10-11.) “[Attachment A] well demonstrates the continued declining cost of solar and the $1/watt-dc price for 2017 utility scale solar as demonstrate in the following figure found in their testimony.” (POC Reply Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy at pp. 4-5.) POC raised the issue of early procurement forcing IOUs to overprocure due to CCA departing load: “Also, procurement before the resource is actually needed for policy objectives is likely to increase total resource costs, and even create stranded costs for IOUs due to reduced load to CCAs, energy efficiency, and customer storage capturing "excess" renewables.” (POC Reply Comment On Proposed Reference System Plan And Related Commission Policy at p. 12.) allows us to avoid a number of other problematic issues that would be associated with implementing such a requirement now. The prospect of a large amount of departing CCA load in the next decade creates a conundrum for renewable procurement, even in the context of RPS, let alone new IRP requirements. The IOUs have made substantial RPS investments and may not need to engage in a great deal of RPS procurement in the near term, especially while facing the prospect of a large amount of departing load. Thus, the largest “need” for renewables will exist for the CCAs that have yet to be launched, since they will then face an immediate RPS obligation under the law. But such entities not yet load are not positioned to be able to take advantage of immediate federal tax credit opportunities by purchasing electricity for customers that they do not yet serve. Therefore, if we ordered immediate additional renewable procurement in this decision, we would be forced, at least to some degree, to rely on IOUs to undertake procurement that they may not need by 2030 to serve their bundled load, and then devise a likely-unpopular
(attorney) above + 2.30% COLA for 2018 per ALJ-352 Robert Freeling (expert) 2017 27.75 $225 established rate of $190 for 2014 + 1.28% COLA for 2016 per ALJ-329 + 2.14% COLA for 2017 per ALJ-345 + increase for increased experience levels from 7-12 to 13+ year range as set in ALJ-345. $6,243.00 27.45 [C] $225.00 $6,176.25 Robert Freeling (expert) 2018 8 $230 2017 rate of $225 as explained above + 2.30% COLA for 2018 per ALJ-352 $1,840.00 7.60 [D] $230.00 $1,748.00 Subtotal: $60,506.00 Subtotal: $60,230.64 INTERVENOR COMPENSATION CLAIM PREPARATION ** Item Year Hours Rate $ Basis for Rate* Total $ Hours Rate Total $ April Maurath Sommer (attorney) 2018 6 $361 2017 rate of $353 as explained above + 2.30% COLA for 2018 per ALJ-352 ½ 2018 rate $1,083.00 6.00 $180.50 [E] $1,083.00 Jamie Pang 2018 24 $150 rates from $1,800.00 39.90 [G] $75.00 [F] $2,992.50