Senate Energy Utilities And Communications Committee

Senators Allen. Here. Allen here. Echobo.

Farragane.

Becker. Aye.

Dally. Aye. Dally here.

Grove.

Reyes. Aye. Reyes here.

McNerney.

Strickland. Strickland here.

Okay. Strickland did not vote aye on the quorum call. You did the right thing. You did the right thing, unlike all of our colleagues here. All right. Let's start with the hearing. I see Senator Bennett's here. He's here to present AB 2458, but we have a rule. I move. Okay, so once you come up, while you get ready, we'll just vote on the consent calendar, which has been moved by Ayesh Wahab. Detective, please call the roll.

Aye.

Echobo? Aye.

Archuleta?

Ashby?

Becker, aye.

Caballero, aye.

Daly, aye.

Grove?

McNerney?

Reyes, aye.

Richardson, aye.

Rubio, aye.

Strickland, aye.

Wahab, aye.

Thank you very much, Chair, members. I'm here today to present AB 2458, and it would allow the California Energy Commission to apply appliance efficiency standards to appliances rented or leased in the state. In the absence of federal action, California established energy efficiency standards back in the 1970s. Some estimates have noted that the energy efficiency standards have saved California residents billions of dollars in energy costs. Unfortunately, the California Energy Commission's existing authority over appliances is limited to items that are sold. The bill corrects that longstanding oversight and would require distributors to ensure that all devices, including those that are rented or leased, to be compliant. This will assure that residents and businesses alike see long-term savings on their energy bills. This is a smart policy, reduces energy demand on the grid, and provides direct savings to rate payers. I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

No witnesses.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members. My name is Scott Cox here on behalf of Ceres, here to voice our strong support.

Hi, good afternoon. Lynn Trujillo with San California Edison in support.

I appreciate the question. I appreciate the fact that we knew about your question in advance. And so I checked with the Energy Commission, and I just want to read to you their specific response.

Food processing is not currently affected by any existing efficiency standards and would not likely be affected by the efficiency standards adopted pursuant to this bill. In other words, they're not doing it for even products sold right now. So this would just add that. So food processing is generally considered an industrial process with large throughput, often using specialized industrial equipment. Specialized industrial equipment falls outside the scope of appliance efficiency standards. The CEC's appliance efficiency standard focuses on appliances that are mass produced and does not cover specialized industrial equipment, making it unlikely that this bill would affect commercial food processing, et cetera. I'll send you the rest of this statement if you would like.

Appreciate the question.

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Do pass to Senate Appropriations Committee. Senator Zellin? Aye. Allen, aye. Echobog, aye. Echobog, aye. Archuleta, Errigin, aye. Errigin, aye. Becker, aye. Caballero, aye. Caballero, aye. Daly, aye. Gonzales, aye. Grove Hurtado McNerney Reyes aye Reyes aye Richardson aye Richardson aye Rubio Aye Rubio aye Strickland Aye Strickland aye Wahab Aye Wahab aye

Aye.

Ashby, aye.

Arrageen? Aye. Arrageen, aye. Ashby?

Ashby, aye. Gonzalez?

Gonzalez, aye. Grove?

Okay, great. We will leave it open in case there's any stragglers. Let's ask Senator Ellis to come forward to present AB 2518. This is item three in your agendas. No, I'm sorry. This is AB 2476. AB 2476. Come on forward. And you may proceed. We usually have you go to the diocese unless you really want to sit down, in which case. Either way. I'm a rookie. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair and members. AB 2476 is a targeted common sense update to the central procurement program created by AB 1373 in 2023. It expands eligibility for pump storage hydro projects without mandating any new procurement, without weakening environmental standards, and without cost to rate payers. The CPUC has already identified a clear need for additional long-duration energy storage. Pump storage hydro is the most proven, efficient, and long-lasting long-duration storage technology we have with 75 to 100-year asset life and the ability to provide capital critical grid stability. It also helps integrate variable renewables and reduce curtailment during periods of overgeneration. Under current law, however, pump storage hydro is only eligible for central procurement if the project is 500 megawatts or smaller and received direct state funding before January 23. My bill simply removes the outdated pre-2023 funding requirement while keeping the 500 megawatt cap. It makes additional high-quality projects eligible for consideration. The AB 2476 opens up more projects to compete. The help keeps costs down for ratepayers while giving California additional tools to maintain grid reliability and meet energy goals. These projects are also significant economic benefits in rural California, in my district and other areas across the state. Here to testify in my support is Michael Bocadoro on behalf of Rye Development and Mandy Isaacs-Lee with Green Gen. Hi, Michael.

Mandy.

Great. Others who want to voice our support for the bill? Mr. Chair, members, Hunter Stern with IBW 1245. We're familiar with the Amador-Calabarra County project support strongly. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Honor. Okay. Anyone else? Opposition? Concerns? Issues with the bill? Okay. We'll bring it to the members for questions. Moved by Senator Wahab. Thoughts? You've left us speechless. Okay. Can I just – Oh, good. Good.

Yeah, I'm happy to do that. Go ahead. Mr. Ellis, if you'd like. So by having additional commercial technologies eligible for procurement into the long-duration energy storage, the PUC actually, in one of their recent decisions when they were authorizing procurement, talked about having pump storage hydro would add additional resources, provide competition, which should help to bring down costs of any procurement. This bill doesn't require procurement. That procurement is going to take place. This just ensures there are more resources that can compete in any procurement going forward. On behalf of the ag energy consumers, I'll put my ratepayer hat on. We're in strong support of the bill. I've talked with TURN. I've talked with the other ratepayer organizations. While they're not in support, they all see benefits. Thank you. If I could comment on that, I'd like to. The beautiful part about this is that while supporting wind and solar, especially solar in the evenings when the price is a lot cheaper, to use it to pump back up the hill so during high peak hours you can unload this water storage so it does reduce rates significantly. Thank you.

All right. We'll give you the chance to close. Oh, yeah. Sorry. Sorry. I just want to make a comment, and that's to thank you for bringing this forward. This is not the only example of energy that's created by irrigation districts and in rural California that doesn't get counted towards the RPS system. And so I think it's really important to recognize that every time we refuse to let a dam that's been in operation for over 100 years count their energy as hydroelectric energy towards the RPS system means that the rate payers have to go out and build a green system that they then don't need the energy for, at least right now, and that that energy gets sold on the open market at a discount, usually out of state during the peak energy time for solar. And so I appreciate what you're doing here. I guess this is one of those situations where you eat the elephant one bite at a time. And I'm going to support your bill today because I think it's the right move. If it's green, it's green. We ought to be counting it. And so thank you, Mr. Chair, for that. Thank you. Great. All right. We'll give you the chance to close. Respectfully ask for your aye vote. Okay. Thank you. All right. Secretary, please call the roll.

Aye.

Aye.

Aragane?

Ashby?

Becker?

Caballero?

Dally?

Gonzalez?

Grove?

Hurtado?

Reyes?

Richardson, aye.

Aye.

Strickland, aye.

Aye.

Great. All right. Thank you. Let's hear from Assemblymember Sharp Collins. You may proceed on writing. This is AB 2518. I'm looking for my... Hi. All right. Good afternoon, Chair and members. I am pleased to present Assembly Bill 2518, a district-specific bill that creates a five-year pilot program in San Diego County to address the connection delays across various sectors. Connection delays often lead to critical infrastructure projects such as affordable housing, schools, hospitals, water projects, and electric vehicle charging stations sitting empty and useless despite being ready for public use. When these delays occur, that means families are left living on the street, children cannot get access to their care that they actually need, and also the project cost rises. In my district, several affordable housing projects have experienced delays. With one reporting, they were energy ready for 103 days before the connection was actually completed. This bill solved this problem by establishing three distinct project categories with staggered connection timelines. Category 1 gives 40 days for the connection once a project is actually deemed construction ready and covers affordable housing, hospitals, and other projects that are designed to protect, support, and also advance public health, safety, or welfare of the community. Category 2 gives 55 days for the municipal and also electric vehicle infrastructure projects. And Category 3 covers all other projects within a 70-day connection window. Assembly Bill 2518 has received no opposition and is strongly supported by SDG&E, who services San Diego County and are looking for ways to get key infrastructure projects to the public faster. I'm looking for everybody, but with me today to testify in support is Israel Silas, governmental affairs manager at SDG&E and also is Frances Barraza, Vice President of the Policy for the San Diego Housing Commission. Okay, come on up.

Thank you very much.

All right, we'll continue with any other members in support of AB 2518 here in room 1200. Seeing none, we'll now continue with any lead opposition. Seeing none, do we have any members in opposition here in room 1200? Seeing none, we bring it back to the dais. Any comments or questions? We have a motion by Senator Richardson. Senator Reyes?

Thank you. Senator Becker?

Any other comments or questions? Just a little bit of clarification, and I'm sorry we have so many committees going on that sometimes we don't get to the details of it. This one in particular, if you can just explain to me a little bit of – I guess I'm trying to get to unintended consequences, not that I see them, but if someone could explain just a little further. you know essentially this is moving projects to the front of the line right and so I always think of creating a faster lane for someone does that slow down potentially other projects for residential for business is there a potential for those unintended consequences for other people the chair appreciate the question and so as the senator noted so the PUC has been working on this issue as part of its SB 410 proceeding. And as part of that work, they've established essentially average timelines that the utilities need to meet for all customers. The timelines in this bill are meant to complement that and work within those existing timelines. So we don't see that as a potential unintended consequence. We actually think it's complementary to that work. And it'll really challenge us to really just do better in this space, given the focus that the legislature and a lot of policymakers have had in this space. Thank you for that explanation. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right. Member Sharp-Collins, thank you for bringing this measure forward. We have a motion by Senator Richardson. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. Oh, sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. Getting excited here to close. That's okay. Would you like to close? I'll just keep it short and sweet. Thank you so much for your time, Chair and members, and I respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. We'll keep that bill open for our absent members. Sounds good. Thank you. We're going to go and open the rolls for the consent calendar. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Archuleta, aye.

Aye.

McNerney, aye.

And we'll keep that open for absent members. Is that it? Okay. So what's the? 24-58. 16-0. It was 16-0. Okay, that's 16-0. This bill passes. We'll now move to file item number 2, AB 2458 by Assemblymember Bennett. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Archuleta?

Archuleta, aye.

Aye.

McNerney?

McNerney, aye.

16-0.

Aye.

Aye.

That's 16-0. That bill also passes. We'll now move on to file item number 4, AB 25A team, member Sharp Collins.

Current vote 14-0. Do pass to appropriations.

Aye.

We'll leave that open for our absent member. So the Committee on Energy Utilities and Commissions will recess.

Okay. All right, we're going to reconvene this hearing. We want to welcome the illustrious John Vane to our proceedings. John, this is going to be very anticlimactic because we're just going to open the roll on one bill. I'm going to vote for it, and then the meeting will be over. So if only everything else here was so simple. So we're going to reopen the roll on AB 2518 Sharp Collins,

Do you pass some end to appropriations?

Allen?

Allen, aye.