Self Generation Incentive Program

Docket R.12-11-005 , R.10-05-004 . Rules for the CSI, the SGIP and Other DG Issues. SGIP website

Decision 11-09-015

__________

Dec 23 the Commission gave notice of its Decision 14-12-033 "Authorizing Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, and Southern California Gas Company to Continue to Collect Funds for the Self Generation Incentive Program Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 379.6 as Amended by Senate Bill 861" signed by the Commission at its December 18, 2014 meeting. The decision authorizes the IOUs to continue to collect amounts through rates necessary to fund the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) at an annual budget of $83 million annually for years 2015 through 2019. SGIP will operate under the existing rules until the Commission implements the directives in SB 861 (Budget Act of 2014, Stats. 2014, ch. 35) to modify SGIP. Funding for SGIP will continue to be collected by the IOUs at the current allocations. The Commission will address the modifications to SGIP, required by SB 861, in a separate decision.

__________ Dec 20, 2014 post:

Commissioner Peevey provided his " Ruling Staying Self-Generation Incentive Program Project Terminations Due to Circumstances Beyond the Control of Program Participants" on Dec 19. In the Ruling, he stated that all SGIP Program Administrators "shall stay all terminations of Self-Generation Incentive Program projects that are unable to achieve operation by the end of their second extension period when the delay is caused by circumstances outside of the program participant’s control until the Commission acts in response to the November 13, 2014 petition for modification." This will address the urgency of the matter (see Dec 5 post below) while preserving the Commission's process timelines. Doosan and CA Energy Storage Alliance filed responses in support of the Nov 13 petition, and in fact CESA even advocated expanding the time extension from just commercial and government SGIP applicants to include residential as well.

Mr. David Davis filed Dec 11 a "Petition for Modification of D.14-03-041 to Correct NEM Eligibility Language." In his petition, Mr. Davis says that SCE is using the language of Decision 14-03-041 to require the removal of residential rooftop solar panels in systems as small as 6kW on the grounds that the panels might produce surplus electricity on an annual basis, and that the Decision, as interpreted by SCE, would cause him to lose NEM eligibility. This was not an issue in the scope of the proceeding, the petition says. SCE requested, and was granted by ALJ DeAngelis on Dec 18, an extension of time to respond to the petition, to Feb 2.

__________ Dec 5, 2014 post:

Parties commented Nov 24 and Dec 1 on the Proposed Decision Authorizing PG&E, SCE, and SoCal Gas to Continue to Collect Funds for the SGIP. Opening and/or reply comments were provided by: SCE; CA Clean DG Coalition; Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Energy Assn; Bloom Energy; FuelCell Energy; PG&E; Center for Sustainable Energy; CA Energy Storage Alliance; CA Solar Energy Industries Assn; Clean Coalition; Office of Ratepayer Advocates; and Doosan Fuel Cell.

Everybody supports the Proposed Decision (PD). SCE suggests that it be also authorized to issue a Tier 2 advice letter if should need to resume collections to prevent shortfall in incentive funds. CCDC resists allowing SCE to stop, pointing out that the “start-stop” feature is disruptive to investors, customers, and developers, and harms the industry. Other parties also oppose the hiatus in SCE collections including CalSEIA, Bloom,and CESA, while CSE seeks “clarification” on these points. Doosan suggests that undersubscription in one service territory should be transferable to other service territories, to help meet program goals. Also, parties do not like SCE’s suggestion that it could change collections and budgets for SGIP simply with an advice letter.

Dec 3 Acting Chief ALJ Sullivan gave notice that Rulemaking 12-11-005 is being reassigned from Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Regina DeAngelis and ALJ Katherine MacDonald to ALJ Regina DeAngelis and ALJ Karin M. Hieta.

The California Energy Storage Association filed, on Dec 2, a "Motion for Expedited Consideration of Petition for Modification of D-11-09-015." CESA is supporting and adding urgency to the Petition filed Nov 13 by all of the SGIP Program Administrators (see Nov 20 post below) to allow a third time extension, to prevent irreparable harm to "some blameless host institutions and entities participating in the SGIP due to unexpected delays outside of their control."

__________ Nov 20, 2014 post:

Sure enough, as noted in the Nov 5 post below, the filing dates for comments on President Peevey's PD were in error. The correct dates are: comments due Nov 24, reply comments due Dec 1, and the earliest that the matter can appear on the Commission's voting calendar is Dec 4.

Nov 13, the CSE filed, on behalf of all three Program Administrators, "Petition of the Center for Sustainable Energy, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company, and Southern California Gas Company for Modification of Decision (D.)11-09-015 to Provide a Maximum of Three Extensions of the Reservation Expiration Date for Commercial and Government Projects Participating in the Self-Generation Incentive Program." As the title suggests, the purpose is to provide a maximum of three six‐month extensions of the Reservation Expiration Date for commercial and government host customers participating in the SGIP. Sometimes only two six-month extensions isn't enough time.

__________ Nov 5, 2014 post:

On Nov 3 Commissioner Peevey issued " Proposed Decision Authorizing Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, and Southern California Gas Company to Continue to Collect Funds for the Self Generation Incentive Program Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 379.6 as Amended by Senate Bill 861" (PD). The PD would authorize PG&E, SCE, and SDG&E to continue to collect in rates amounts for the continuation of the SGIP. The annual budget is proposed to be $55 million for year 2015 and $83 million annually for years 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. SCE is allowed to suspend collections for 2015. SGIP will operate under the existing rules until the California Public Utilities Commission implements the directives in Senate Bill 861 to modify SGIP. The Commission will address the modifications to SGIP, required by SB 861, in a separate decision. Comments are due Nov 24, and reply comments Dec 1. The announcement states that the item will be on the Commission's Nov 6 agenda, which has to be a typo. It is more likely to be scheduled for the Dec 4 meeting.

__________ Oct 20, 2014 post:

On Oct 15 parties filed opening comments on President Peevey's Sept 23 Ruling (see Oct 5 post below), and on Oct 20, reply comments. Parties filing opening comments included: PG&E; CA Clean DG Coalition; Office of Ratepayer Advocates; CA Energy Storage Alliance; CA Solar Energy Industries Assn; Center for Sustainable Energy; SCE; SCG; and Bloom Energy. Replies came in from: PG&E; SCG; Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Energy Assn; Center for Sustainable Energy; CA Energy Storage Alliance; CA Solar Energy Industries Assn; Custom Power Solar; and Doosan Fuel Cell America.

Parties were generally supportive of extending SGIP at its full $83 million per year collection rate. CESA and CalSEIA raised some additional issues, which PG&E deemed "out of scope" in their reply comments, but that will be interesting going forward. Issues added included programmatic changes, such as eligibility criteria, GHG measurements, performance-based incentive calculations, incentive thresholds, rates and tariffs, measurement and verification, and others. PG&E's objection was more about the procedural matter of having only 5 days in reply comments to address important issues, than it was about the substance of CalSEIA's and CESA's suggestions. SCE and ORA suggested suspending collections for one or more years. CalSEIA presented data showing a success rate of only 1.7% for storage projects due to utility roadblocks, facts which PG&E disputes.

__________ Oct 5, 2014 post:

Commissioner Peevey notified parties Sept 23 of his Ruling regarding the Implementation of Public Utilities Code Section 379.6 of Senate Bill 861 to Extend the Self-Generation Incentive Program. SB 861 makes a number of changes to SGIP, including:

1. Authorizes collections for SGIP through 2019.

2. Authorizes administration of SGIP through 2020.

3. Requires the Commission to update the factor for avoided greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on or before July 1, 2015.

4. Restricts SGIP eligibility to distributed energy resource (DER) technologies that: a. Reduce demand from the grid by offsetting customer onsite energy load;

b. Are commercially available;

c. Safely utilize the grid; and

d. Improve air quality by reducing criteria air pollutants.

5. Subjects incentive recipients to audits and inspections.

6. Requires the Commission to determine a capacity factor for each DER technology.

7. Simplifies the requirements needed to qualify for an additional incentive as a California manufacturer.

8. Requires the Commission to measure the program’s overall success based on: a. Greenhouse gas emissions.

b. Criteria air pollutant air emission reductions and credits secured.

c. Energy reductions as measured in energy value.

d. Reductions of aggregate noncoincident customer peak demand.

e. Capacity factor.

f. Avoided costs for grid upgrades and replacements.

g. Onsite reliability.

The ruling addresses that portion of SB 861 that extends authorization for collections through 2019. SGIP collections of $83 million per year are currently authorized through 2014. The remaining issues will be addressed in 2015.

Comments may be filed by October 15, 2014 on whether the Commission should authorize Self-Generation Incentive Program collections of $83 million per year, allocated across the four relevant utilities (PG&E, SCE, SDG&E, SCG) for the years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019. Reply comments are due Oct 20.

__________ Aug 5, 2014 post:

July 23 ALJ De Angelis' issued " Ruling Approving Plan for Measurement and Evaluation Reports of the Self-Generation Incentive Program for Program Years 2014 and 2015." On June 12, 2014, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) filed a motion on behalf of the Self-Generation Incentive Program’s (SGIP) program administrators requesting approval of their Plan for Measurement and Evaluation (M&E) Reports for the SGIP for program years 2014 and 2015. This ruling approves the M&E Reports Plan with modifications. the modifications are to remove the Final Program Summary Report and remove the request to modify the Measurement and Evaluation Plan without filing a motion in the proceeding.

__________ Jun 20, 2014 post:

On June 9, Commissioner Michael R. Peevey issued a Ruling and Scoping Memo concerning the continuation of Rulemaking 12-11-005. Issues to be covered include:

• Ongoing review, evaluation, and consideration of modification to policies and program rules for CSI and its many sub-programs including, but not limited to, the general market CSI Program, the Single Family Affordable Solar Homes (SASH) Program, the Multifamily Affordable Solar Housing (MASH) Program, the CSI Research, Development, and Demonstration Program, and the CSI Thermal Program. These issues include implementation of AB 217 (Bradford, Stats. 2013, ch. 609), and review of program administrator effectiveness. AB 217 (effective January 1, 2014) amended § 2851 and § 2852 of the Pub. Util. Code to, among other things, authorize the continued collection of a surcharge from ratepayers to fund the low income portions of the CSI Program, known as the SASH and MASH Programs. CSI Program issues may also include any related budgetary and administrative issues to be resolved at or before the CSI’s statutory sunset date of December 31, 2016;

• Consideration of whether and how to ensure continuing market transformation and customer protections after the close of CSI. The CSI Program provides a host of customer protections. Going forward, the Commission will need to decide what customer protections to continue providing, how to implement them, and how to fund them. One such issue, regarding the transfer of responsibility for collecting solar statistics from the CSI program to the interconnection process, was discussed in the August 22, 2013 Assigned Commissioner’s Ruling. This pending issue and other remaining customer protection issues will be addressed in this proceeding;

• Ongoing review, evaluation, and consideration of modification to SGIP with emphasis on consideration of potential modification to SGIP under SB 412 (Kehoe, Stats. 2009, ch. 192). Two bills related to SGIP are currently pending in the 2013 - 2014 Regular Legislative Session, AB 1499 (Skinner) and AB 1624 (Gordon). These bills would extend the SGIP and direct program changes. This proceeding will address any program modifications necessary should these or other bills become law.

• In D.13-11-025, which was issued in a different proceeding (Application (A.) 12-11-001), the Commission clarified that issues related to the source and level of funding for solar on new construction pursuant to § 2851, the New Solar Homes Partnership, should be added to the scope of this proceeding. Those portions of SB 96 (Budget Act of 2013) relevant to the New Solar Homes Partnership will also be addressed in this proceeding;

• Issues related to the electric utilities’ tariffs for Net Energy Metering currently fall within the scope of this proceeding and have already been addressed in D.14-03-041 and D.14-05-033. However, due to the volume and complexity of these issues and other issues related to Net Energy Metering, the Commission anticipates that these issues will be addressed in a separate proceeding to be initiated by the Commission shortly.

The schedule is set forth as follows:

[table id=33 /]

June 12, PG&E, on behalf of itself and the other Self Generation Incentive Program Administrators, filed "MOTION OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 39 E), ON BEHALF OF THE SELF GENERATION INCENTIVE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATORS TO APPROVE PLAN FOR MEASUREMENT AND EVALUATION REPORTS FOR PROGRAM YEARS 2014 AND 2015" seeking approval of their proposal for Measurement and Evaluation (M&E) Reports for the SGIP for Program Years (PY) 2014 and 2015.

This proposal by the PAs, which has been approved by the SGIP Working Group, includes an overview description of the studies to be conducted, the approximate schedules and estimated overall cost for M&E activities for the 2014 and 2015 program years. This proposal also suggests revisions to the schedule of one of those studies. Two purposes of this M&E activity are to continue prior studies mandated by the CPUC in the past where still relevant, and to answer questions related to the program’s future (should the program continue beyond 2015.) Within these categories, four studies are proposed:

• Annual Impact Evaluations: Collect data, conduct analyses and provide annual impact evaluations on the SGIP for program years 2013, 2014 and 2015;

• Renewable Fuel Use: Prepare annual renewable fuel use reports extending from August 2014 through August 2016 (a total of 3 annual reports);

• Cost-Effectiveness Study: Conduct cost-benefit analyses of all SGIP-eligible distributed generation technologies, with minor investigation into technologies that may be SGIP-eligible in the future;

• Market Transformation Study: Conduct a market transformation study that will assess the extent to which the SGIP has affected the transformation of the California distributed energy market since the adoption of the SGIP;

• Final Program Summary: Prepare a final summary report covering the entirety of the SGIP from its inception in 2001 through the end of 2015.

The PAs made an additional joint filing June 10, responding to Protest of CCSE Advice Letter 47 / PG&E Advice Letter 3474-G/4417-E / SCE Advice Letter 3038-E / SCG Advice Letter 4644, an advice filing to propose modifications to the Self-Generation Incentive Program Handbook to include revised capacity rating methodology for Pressure Reduction Turbines and Waste Heat to Power Technologies and the inclusion of conventional topping cycle Steam Turbines. The protest was filed by the Association of CA Water Agencies (ACWA). ACWA protests the Advice Letter on two grounds: 1) The generating system rated capacity for Pressure Reduction Turbine (PRT) technologies is based upon recorded pressure and flows solely from the previous year; and 2) The proposed modifications will not be retroactive for not‐yet‐constructed PRT installations. The PAs agree with the first point, and mildly disagree with the second point, leaving it to Energy Division staff to decide, but recommending against it.

__________ May 20, 2014 post:

The California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE), on behalf of itself, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE), and Southern California Gas Company (SCG), filed CCSE Advice Letter 47 / PG&E Advice Letter 3474-G/4417-E / SCE Advice Letter 3038-E / SCG Advice Letter 4644, on May 14. The purpose of the advice filing is to propose modifications to the Self-Generation Incentive Program Handbook to include revised capacity rating methodology for Pressure Reduction Turbines and Waste Heat to Power Technologies and the inclusion of conventional topping cycle Steam Turbines.

Due to the size of Attachment A, the Redline Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Handbook illustrating proposed amendments, rather than providing a hard copy of the document, CCSE instead provided notice that Attachment A may be viewed at: http://energycenter.org/proposed-2014-sgip .

__________ Mar 5, 2014 post:

On Friday, Feb 21, Pacific Gas and Electric Company submitted Advice Letter 3456-G to the Commission: "Revisions to Gas Schedules G-EG, G-SUR, and Gas Rule 1 in Compliance with Assembly Bill 796." The purpose of this advice filing is to update PG&E’s Gas Schedules G-EG – Gas Transportation Service to Electric Generation, G-SUR – Customer-Procured Gas Franchise Fee Surcharge, and Gas Rule 1 – Definitions, to comply with AB 796. AB 796 is applicable to Advanced Electrical Distributed Generation Technology and extends the sunset date of PUC Section 379.8 to January 1, 2016 from its original end date of January 1, 2014. This code section extends beneficial gas rates to technologies that are as efficient as cogeneration.

__________ Feb 20, 2014 post:

CPUC staff gave notice Feb 7 that the 12 th Annual Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Impact Evaluation has been posted to the Commission’s website. The report by consultant Itron concludes that the SGIP has made significant progress in reducing GHG emissions, has steadily improved its contribution to peak demand reduction, will likely provide even greater GHG emission reductions and peak demand benefits in the future, is helping to transform the distributed energy resources market, and continues to provide a balanced and diversified portfolio of technologies and resources. Itron recommends that the PUC continue investigating ways to reduce GHG emissions and maximize peak demand benefits and measure market transformation impacts resulting from the SGIP.

__________ Jan 5, 2014 post:

The 2014 Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Handbook and application forms have been posted to the Program Administrator websites:

Pacific Gas and Electric: http://www.pge.com/en/mybusiness/save/selfgen/index.page

California Center for Sustainable Energy: http://energycenter.org/programs/self-generation-incentive-program

Southern California Edison: www.sce.com/SGIP

Southern California Gas Company: http://www.socalgas.com/innovation/self-generation/

Application forms from previous years will not be accepted.

__________ Oct 5, 2013 post:

CESA filed a response Sept 23 to comments on its Petition for Modification filed by DRA, Clean Coalition, and the Joint Utilities (see Sept 20 post below). CESA largely agreed with the commenters, but took exception to the Joint Utilities, saying "The Commission should simply disregard this hyper-litigious approach to what is a serious policy issue, because it has nothing to do with the merits of the Petition." CESA makes clear that their policy question to the Commission is about the eligibility of small TES systems for either the Permanent Load Shifting Program, or the Self Generation Incentive Program, not both, and urges the Commission to clarify this point.

__________ Sept 20, 2013 post:

The Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) submitted a response to the Petition of the California Energy Storage Alliance (CESA) for Modification (PFM) of Decision (D.) 11-09-015, which CESA had filed Aug 5. CESA’s PFM requests that the Commission modify D.11-09-015 to “clarify that small thermal energy storage systems integrated with direct expansion refrigerant based air conditioning units sized at twenty tons or less to offset on-peak energy consumption (Small TES) qualify as an “emerging” Advanced Energy Storage (AES) technology eligible for incentives under the Commission’s Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP), provided such Small TES systems meet all other applicable eligibility requirements of the SGIP.”

DRA recommends that the Commission consider the proposed modification of D.11-09-015 in conjunction with the California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE)’s Advice Letter 40, which was filed on August 14, 2013. Advice Letter 40 proposes to modify the eligibility and metering requirements, and the incentive calculation methodology in the SGIP Handbook for Advanced Energy Storage (AES) Technologies. One of the major changes Advice Letter 40 recommends is directly related to the relief sought by this PFM. Advice Letter 40 proposes to modify the eligibility requirements for Emerging Small TES projects so that if they meet the California Energy Commission (CEC) Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Compliance Option eligibility requirements and acceptance testing criteria, TES systems may qualify as a building energy savings measure and thereby meet the SGIP minimum operating efficiency and related greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction criteria.

Similarly, CESA had filed a Petition for Modification of D.12-04-045 Adopting Demand Response Activities and Budgets for 2012 through 2014 on Aug 12. CESA had filed the PFM to modify the decision in the demand response case, eliminating small TES eligibility for the Permanent Load Shifting (PLS) program as they were petitioning to have this technology included in the SGIP.

Sept 10 a Joint Response of Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company, San Diego Gas and Electric Company, and Southern California Gas Company (Joint Utilities) to CESA’s PFM was filed, requesting that it be denied. At issue is the characterization of small TES as “emerging” or not, and moving it from the PLS program, where it receives a $0.875/W incentive, versus the SGIP program, where the incentive would be $2.00.

DRA also responded to this later PFM by CESA on Sept 11, again urging the Commission to consider CCSE’s Advice 40 approach. For its own part, CCSE responded to the protest by all the other utilities of its Advice 40, saying that it offers the Commission a resolution to the dispute over “emerging” vs. “mature” and saying that it did not act unilaterally in bad faith, as it had negotiated for months with the other utilities, and could not come to agreement.

CESA then filed, on Sept 17, a “Motion for Leave to File Reply to Responses to Petition for Modification.” ALJ Kelly Hymes responded the same day, granting CESA’s motion, saying “In its Motion, CESA claims that its reply “will aid the Commission in developing a more robust record upon which to fully and fairly consider the merits of the Petition, and no party would be prejudiced.” CESA suggests that the “ reply could serve as a reasonable substitute for the Division of Ratepayer Advocates recommended procedural suggestion to augment the record for the benefit of the Commission” and could “provide a framework for and facilitate a dialogue among the parties that could lead to informal resolution of the issues presented by the Petition.”

“CESA’s request is reasonable in that it moves this proceeding forward in an efficient manner. I generally encourage efficiency in proceedings, as does the Commission. The motion by CESA to file a reply to the responses to its Petition for Modification is granted.

“CESA shall file and serve its reply no later than Monday, September 23, 2013.”

DWEA filed its reply Sept 16 to the three responses, received from the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) as well as by Southern California Edison Company, on behalf of the SGIP Program Administrators (PAs) (Joint Response), and the California Clean DG Coalition (CCDC), to the DWEA's Petition to Modify Decision 11-09-015. They essentially just disagree with DRA, SCE, and CCDC on each of their points, and would like to see small wind projects get a preferential adder (see Sept 5, Aug 3 posts below).

__________ Sept 5, 2013 post:

An updated version of the 2013 Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Handbook was posted to the Program Administrator’s websites on September 3, 2013.

This version of the Handbook contains limited clarifying language to address system sizing criteria for wind turbines sized 30 kW and less; minimum annual discharge hours for advanced energy storage (to conform with Appendix A of Commission Resolution E-4519), and; system sizing criteria for customers participating in the recently revised net energy metering fuel cell program.

A protest was filed Sept 3 against CCSE's Aug 16 Advice Letter 40 by a coalition of Program Administrators - all of them, except CCSE. PG&E, SCE, SDG&E and SoCal Gas complain that the advice letter was filed unilaterally and without consensus among all the PAs by CCSE. The advice letter contains proposed SGIP Handbook changes that affect the administration of the SGIP by all of the PAs. Furthermore, they say, the proposed changes to the SGIP Handbook are premature since they precede a final decision by the California Public Utilities Commission (Commission) on whether thermal energy storage (TES) should be considered an emerging technology in the SGIP. , CCSE's Advice No. 40 proposed modifications to the SGIP Handbook that specify the eligibility criteria, metering requirement, and incentive calculation for emerging TES technologies.

The CA Clean DG Coalition (CCDC) filed a response Aug 28 to the Petition of Distributed Wind Energy Association (“DWEA”) to Modify Decision (“D.”) 11-09-015. DWEA was asking that the SGIP program be modified to (1) provide a $1.75 per watt adder for the first 10 kW of capacity and $1.00 per watt for the next 20 kW of capacity for wind turbines up to 30 kW, with each declining at a rate of 10% per year starting in 2015; and (2) exempt the adder for turbines up to 30 kW from the SGIP incentive limit as a share of project cost. CCDC recommends that the SGIP program not be modified piecemeal for specific technologies, especially at this late date in its program life. The current SGIP budget is limited in amount and duration, and an increase in incentives for one technology may limit or reduce availability of funds for other technologies. Additionally, it may be appropriate to evaluate the adequacy of incentive levels for other SGIP-eligible technologies, they say, and suggest that it would be more efficient for the Commission to wait to see if theLegislature authorizes SGIP funding beyond 2014.

Similarly, CCDC responded Sept 4 to the "Petition of the California Energy Storage Alliance for Modification of Decision 11-09-015." Parallel to the DWEA petition, CESA's petition seeks to clarify that small thermal energy storage systems integrated with direct expansion refrigerant based air conditioning units sized at 20 tons or less to offset on-peak energy consumption (“Small TES”) qualify as “emerging” Advanced Energy Storage (“AES”) technology eligible for incentives under SGIP. CCDC puts forth the same logic in recommending that the Commission not adjust SGIP incentive eligibility or levels in a piecemeal fashion at this time.

The Division of Ratepayer Advocates also filed a response to the DWEA petition. It is premature, DRA says, to grant the relief requested, but rather than denying the Amended Petition, DRA recommends that the Commission develop a fuller record, in Rulemaking (R.)12-11-005, in order to assess whether and how the higher incentives requested by DWEA could stimulate demand to a level sufficient to drive down costs for small wind. Such consideration should also account for the limited funding available for all eligible technologies, and should not undermine the goals of the program.

SCE also responded to the DWEA Petition. SCE cites 6 procedural defects in the petition, and says that it is also inconsistent with commission policy (removing percentage of cost limitation) and is not supported by facts in the record.

__________ Aug 20, 2013 post:

Aug 5 the California Energy Storage Alliance filed a Petition for Modification of D. 11-09-015 "Decision to Modify the Self-Generation Incentive Program and Implementing Senate Bill 412." In their petition, CESA states that the Decision should be modified to clarify that small thermal energy storage systems integrated with direct expansion refrigerant based air conditioning units sized at 20 tons or less to offset on-peak energy consumption (“Small TES”) do not qualify as “mature” and are therefore not eligible for incentives under the Permanent Load Shifting (“PLS”) Program established under the 2012 though 2014 Demand Response decision. These systems should be eligible under the Self Generation Incentive program, and they made a separate filing in the PG&E demand response budget application docket to that effect.

__________ Aug 3, 2013 post:

Distributed Wind Energy Association (DWEA) amended their Petition to Modify (petition) D.11-09-015, described in the Mar 5 post, below. The new petition replaces their Jan 23 version, and seeks to: 1) provide a $1.75/W adder for the first 10kW of capacity and $1.00/W for the next 20kW of capacity for wind turbines up to 30kW and small wind turbine adders decline at 10% per year starting in 2015; 2) exempt the adder for turbines up to 30kW from the SGIP incentive limit as a share of project cost.

__________ Apr 20, 2013 post:

The Energy Division's staff report on the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) budget is now available online .

This report was issued pursuant to Commission Decision 11-12-030, which directs Energy Division to review the SGIP budget and submit a report to the assigned Commissioner and Administrative Law Judge with recommendations on any adjustments to the budget for 2013 and 2014.

Based upon available data, Energy Division recommends maintaining the $83 million annual SGIP budget for 2013 and 2014, and makes the following observations:

1. Carryover funding from prior years has been reduced from $165 to $84 million since the adoption of D.11-09-015.

2. There was a significant increase in the amount of incentives requested for energy storage technologies and a steady increase in the amount of funding for fuel cells in the 2011/12 period. The program has not received any applications for wind turbine systems sized below 30 kW since the adoption of D.12-05-037.

3. There is a sizeable amount of carryover funding for administration, measurement and evaluation (M&E), and marketing and outreach (M&O) expenses. However, Energy Division staff believes it is premature to transfer these funds until data is available on the costs associated with administering performance based incentive payments.

________ Mar 5, 2013 post:

PG&E, SCE, and CCSE (SGIP PAs) filed a joint response Feb 22 to the Petition of Distributed Wind Energy Association (DWEA) to Modify Decision 11-09-015 (Petition), (filed January 23, 2013). The Petition was discussed in the Jan 5 post, below, in an earlier version. In their response, the SGIP PAs urged the Commission to reject DWEA’s Petition for the following reasons:

 DWEA’s Petition was not timely filed and lacks adequate justification for filing the Petition after September 8, 2012.

 Because Rulemaking 10-05-004 is closed, DWEA should propose its modifications to SGIP in the follow-on rulemaking, R.12-11-005, which the Commission instituted to address new and ongoing SGIP, California Solar Initiative, and distributed generation issues.

 DWEA’s proposal is not supported by the existing record or sufficient additional facts.

 DWEA’s proposal to exempt the adder for turbines up to 30kW from the SGIP incentive limit as a share of project cost is inconsistent with Commission policy.

________ Feb 5, 2013 post:

The 2013 Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Handbook, application forms, and available budget will be posted to the Program Administrator websites on Monday, February 11 th .

Program Administrators will resume accepting completed applications on Tuesday, February 19 th at 8:00am. Application forms from previous years will not be accepted. For any questions contact Ehren Seybert ehren.seybert@cpuc.ca.gov .

________ Jan 5, 2013 post:

The Distributed Wind Energy Association (DWEA) submitted on Dec 22 a petition to modify Decision (D) 11-09-0152 which modified the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) and Implemented Senate Bill (SB) 412. In their petition, DWEA asks the Commission to: 1) provide a $1.75/W adder for the first 10kW of capacity and $1.00/W for the next 20kW of capacity for wind turbines up to 30kW and small wind turbine adders decline at 10% per year starting in 2015; 2) exempt the adder for turbines up to 30kW from the SGIP incentive limit as a share of project cost.

_________ Dec 20, 2012 post:

The 2013 Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Handbook and forms will be posted on the utility websites around the last week of January; Program Administrators will begin accepting 2013 applications one week thereafter. The CPUC Energy Division will provide more specific details once dates have been finalized.

_________ Dec 5, 2012 post:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), filed Dec 3, on behalf of the Program Administrators for the Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP), the Twentieth Semi-Annual Renewable Fuel Use Report for completed SGIP projects that utilize renewable fuels (in compliance with California Public Utilities Commission Decision 02-09-051, September 19, 2002). The report provides the Energy Division of the CPUC with the required updated renewable fuel use information on completed SGIP projects using renewable fuel and helps assist the Energy Division in making recommendations concerning modifications to the renewable project aspects of the SGIP. Due to a growing interest in the potential for renewable fuel use projects to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the report also includes a section on GHG emission impacts from renewable fuel SGIP projects.

_________ Nov 20, 2012 post:

Nov 8 Commission President Peevey filed an " Order Extending Statutory Deadline," a legal formality to allow the Rulemaking 10-05-004 docket to stay open until January 7, 2013. Then on Nov 15, he issued " Order Instituting Rulemaking Regarding Policies, Procedures and Rules for the California Solar Initiative, the Self-Generation Incentive Program and Other Distributed Generation Issues," which will have the number R.12-11-005 . This new rulemaking is initiated to continue the work from Rulemaking (R.) 10-05-004 for the purpose of development and refinement of policies, rules and programs for the California Solar Initiative and the Self-Generation Incentive Program and to continue the Commission's consideration more generally of policies for the development of cost-effective, clean and reliable distributed generation. R.10-05-004 will be closed, and all outstanding matters are transferred to this new Rulemaking, with the exceptionof a pending application for rehearing of Decision 12-05-036 that matter will be considered and addressed in R.10-05-004. The new Rulemaking was assigned to President Peevey and ALJ Katherine MacDonald.

__________ Oct 20, 2012 post:

Pacific Gas & Electric will resume accepting completed 2012 applications for renewable/emerging technologies in the Self-Generation Incentive Program on Monday, October 29 th . Reservation and waitlist spots for the 2012 program year will both be made available. Additional funds are based on project attrition, as well as a transfer from the previous year’s unspent non-renewable budget.

On October 15, 2012, SCE filed a joint advice letter with the Commission entitled "Proposed Amendments to the Self-Generation Incentive Program Handbook to Conform to Resolution E-4519."

Individual numbers for each company are: Advice 2794-E (Southern California Edison Company); Advice 3332-G/4124-E (Pacific Gas and Electric Company); Advice 4410-G (Southern California Gas Company); Advice 33 (California Center for Sustainable Energy) .

The approved modifications in the Resolution and the SGIP Handbook are to change the Round-Trip Efficiency (RTE) requirement for Advanced Energy Storage (AES), and to relax certain site-specific metering and monitoring protocols. The Commission determined that a 5 percent differential in line losses that occur between on-peak and off-peak times is reasonable and shall be applied to the RTE calculation. The recalculated RTE is 63.5 percent. Furthermore, the Commission determined that emissions factors used in the RTE calculation are appropriate in determining greenhouse gas compliance. The Commission approved the elimination of certain data formatting requirements by performance data providers for combined heat and power (CHP) systems 300 kW and smaller. The SGIP PAs incorporated language into the SGIP Handbook that eliminated the EDI 867 data formatting requirement for all system sizes and technologies prior to this Resolution.

___________ Sept 20, 2012 post:

Resolution E-4519 was adopted by the Commission on September 13, 2012. The resolution approves the Self-Generation Incentive Program Handbook with modifications to include (a) elimination of certain data formatting requirements by performance data providers for combined heat and power systems 300 kW and smaller, and (b) a 5 percent line loss differential between peak and off-peak times for the calculation of round-trip efficiency for advanced energy storage.

___________ Aug 20, 2012 post:

Energy Division staff filed a Draft Resolution (DR), which addresses Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E)'s supplemental Advice Letter 3253-G-A/3940-E-A. Draft Resolution E-4519 is currently scheduled to appear on the agenda for the September 13, 2012 Commission Meeting. Comments are due Sept 3, and there will be no reply comments.

The DR addresses an appeal by the California Energy Storage Alliance (CESA) to Energy Division staff’s disposition of PG&E's supplemental Advice Letter 3253-G-A/3940-E-A. This Advice Letter, filed on behalf of all of the Self-Generation Incentive Program Administrators, details revisions to the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Handbook to implement Decision (D.) 11-09-015. The DR approves the PG&E-proposed revisions to the SGIP Handbook with modifications to include (a) elimination of certain data formatting requirements by performance data providers for combined heat and power (CHP) systems 300 kW and smaller, and (b) a 5 percent line loss differential between peak and off-peak times for the calculation of round-trip efficiency for advanced energy storage.

_____________ July 20, 2012 post:

CPUC staff has notified parties that SoCalGas has opened their waitlists for Renewable/Emerging and Non-Renewable funding for the Self-Generation Incentive Program. For questions, contact Ehren Seybert, CPUC staff, (415) 703-5991 ehren.seybert@cpuc.ca.gov

PG&E filed July 11 a "Supplemental Request for Exception under General Order 96-B Section 8.2.3 for the County of Sonoma, Department of General Services, to Retain their Self Generation Incentive Program Incentive." Since the County of Sonoma’s application for SGIP was received and processed according to the 2009 rules, the County is currently unable to both receive an SGIP incentive and participate in the AB 1613 Program, as would a similarly-situated customer under the currently-effective 2012 rules. The filing seeks to correct this unfair result.

_____________ June 5, 2012 post:

The SGIP manufacturer concentration limit for Program Years 2011 and 2012 amounts to $89,617,655. Program Administrators will not accept applications from manufacturers that have reached or exceeded this limit for 2011 and 2012 reservations.

In an effort to diversify the ratepayer portfolio of distributed energy resources and reduce over-exposure to any one product or developer, any single equipment manufacturer under the SGIP is limited to 40% of the annual statewide SGIP budget. The annual statewide SGIP budget is defined as the authorized budget allocation plus carry-over funds from previous program years.

Because SGIP began accepting new reservations with only a couple of months left in 2011, the initial 40% limit will cover the period from the launch of the new program through 2012.

Should you have any questions regarding this policy, please contact any of the Program Administrators.

____________ May 20, 2012 post:

The Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Program Administrators have developed a standard request form for SGIP suppliers who wish to request eligibility as a California supplier. SGIP participants may be eligible for an additional 20 percent incentive if they qualify as a California supplier under Section 379.6 of the Public Utilities Code, (added by AB 2267 (Fuentes, 2008)). The California supplier incentive is subject to the SGIP program rules under Commission Decision 11-09-015 , including the $5 million incentive limit and requirement for applicants to pay 40% of eligible project costs.

The document “Request for California Supplier Status" (which can be found on PG&E's website here ) provides information and instructions for suppliers wishing to claim California supplier status. Please note that, for documentation purposes, California suppliers who have previously been approved by the SGIP working group are also required to complete the document.

CALIFORNIA SUPPLIER APPLICATION PROCESS

Interested parties who wish to be considered for the California supplier status by the SGIP working group must complete the “Request for California Supplier Status,” and submit it to Mr. Ehren Seybert at ehren.seybert@cpuc.ca.gov . A project may forfeit the California Supplier adder if the document is not completed and approved by the SGIP working group prior to the submission of the project’s Incentive Claim Form (ICF). Once an applicant has been approved for California supplier status they no longer need to submit the “Request for California Supplier Status."

Mr. Seybert can be contacted for any questions pertaining to the CA supplier application process.

__________ May 5, 2012 post:

All of the Self Generation Incentive Program funding for Renewable/Emerging projects in the SoCalGas territory has been allocated for the 2012 program year. The waitlist limit for these projects has also been reached, so no additional Renewable/Emerging applications will be accepted in the SoCalGas territory for 2012. If you have a Renewable or Emerging SGIP project in SoCalGas territory, additional funds will be made available on January 1 st , 2013.

At this time SoCalGas and PG&E still have Non-Renewable funding available, and all the other Program Administrators have funds for Renewable, Emerging, and Non-Renewable projects.

___________ Apr 20, 2012 post:

All of the Self Generation Incentive Program funding for Renewable/Emerging projects in PG&E territory has been allocated for the 2012 program year. The waitlist limit for these projects has also been reached, so no more Renewable/Emerging applications will be accepted in PG&E territory for 2012. If you have a Renewable or Emerging SGIP project in PG&E territory, additional funds will be made available on January 1 st , 2013.

Please note that PG&E still has Non-Renewable funding available, and all the other Program Administrators have funds for both Renewable, Emerging, and Non-Renewable projects.

SoCalGas has had very little activity so far in 2012 and invites interested parties to submit applications, which can be found here:

http://www.socalgas.com/innovation/self-generation

____________ Apr 5, 2012 post:

The 2012 Self Generation Incentive Program Handbook and application forms are complete. They will be posted to Program Administrator websites and available for download on Thursday, April 5 th . Program Administrators will resume accepting completed applications one week later, on Thursday April 12 th . Note that application forms from previous years will not be accepted.

The Commission has approved Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) Advice Letter 3253-G/3940-E, a Supplemental Filing which proposed revisions to the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Handbook to implement Decision 11-09-015: Implementation of the Hybrid-Performance-Based Incentive Payment Structure; Metering and Monitoring Protocols; and Other Amendments. This Advice Letter was submitted by PG&E on behalf of the SGIP Program Administrators, and is effective as of March 22 nd , 2012.

____________ Mar 20, 2012 post:

The California Clean Distributed Generation Coalition (CCDC) and the California Energy Storage Alliance (CESA) filed protests to "Supplemental Filing: Proposed Revisions to the Self Generation Incentive Program Handbook to Implement Decision (D.) 11-09-015: Implementation of the Hybrid-Performance-Based Incentive Payment Structure; Metering and Monitoring Protocols; Other Amendments" filed by the Program Administrators (PG&E, SCE, SCG, CCSE). CCDC observed that while the PAs had made some movement, the cost of administration would still likely exceed the value of the SGIP benefit, in particular for small engine-based projects. CESA proposed different methodologies for calculating round-trip efficiency and GHG emissions, and recommended that advanced energy storage projects be temporarily exempt from GHG emission requirements. The PAs filed a response to the protests on March 19th, taking exception to all the points raised in the protests, but saying that they "are open to CCDC’s proposal to evaluate participation levels of small CHP systems in the future in order to determine if metering/PDP costs as currently structured continue to present barriers to SGIP participation by small CHP systems." It appears that without further intervention from the Commission (which is not expected), that the advice letters and SGIP Handbook revisions will stand as is.

_________________ Mar 5, 2012 post:

The Energy Division has granted a request by the California Energy Storage Alliance to give parties an additional 10 days to file protests to Advice Letter 3253-G/3940-E of PG&E; Advice Letter 24-A of CCSE, Advice Letter 2651-E-A of SCE, and Advice Letter 4292-A of SCG. This joint supplemental Advice Letter, which proposed revisions to the Self Generation Incentive Program Handbook to implement D. 11-09-015, was filed on February 17th, 2012.

To facilitate a rapid program re-launch, a shortened time period of 10 days was initially given to file responses. The Energy Division considered CESA’s request and extended the deadline for filing protests to this joint Advice Letter to March 12 th , 2012.

___________________ Feb 20, 2012 post:

PG&E filed Joint Advice Letter 3253-G-A/3940 –E-A on behalf of all Program Administrators to propose revisions to the Self-Generation Incentive Program Handbook to implement Decision (D.) 11-09-015. The Advice Letter covers implementation of the Hybrid-Performance-Based Incentive Payment Structure as well as Metering and Monitoring Protocols, and other amendments. The Program Administrators request expedited treatment of the Advice Letter, with protests due Feb 27 and an Effective Date of Mar 8.

RightCycle filed Feb 8 a Motion for Party Status and Petition for Modification of D.11-09-015 and the SGIP Handbook to allow Pressure Reduction Turbines to be eligible for the $2 per watt biogas adder, which is currently available only for conventional CHP and fuel cells.

______________ Jan 5, 2012 post:

The Commission issued Decision 11-12-030 December 20, 2011 which had been approved at their Dec 15 regular Business Meeting. The decision adopted an annual budget of $83 million for the Commission’s Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) for 2012, 2013, and 2014. The Commission also directed the Energy Division to complete a review of SGIP participation, spending patterns by eligible technologies, and carryover funding in early 2013. Energy Division was directed to prepare an SGIP budget report with recommendations on any potential adjustments to the SGIP budget for 2013 and 2014 and submit it to the Administrative Law Judge and assigned Commissioner no later than March 15, 2013.

Rulemaking 10-05-004 remains open.

________________ Dec 20, 2011 post:

On Dec 19 PG&E filed on behalf of all of the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Program Administrators (PAs), a reply to the protests to PG&E’s Advice Letter 3253-G/3940-E, (Advice Letter), filed by FlexEnergy, Debenham Energy, California Energy Storage Alliance (CESA), California Clean DG Coalition (CCDC), Ballard Power Systems, Bloom Energy, and SolarCity Corporation.

PG&E promises to file in early 2012 a supplemental advice letter accepting two points in CCDC’s protest relating to cost of metering and monitoring requirements and direct exhaust combined cooling heating and power. All other issues they request the Commission to reject either because they are in disagreement or the issues are not relevant to the advice letter as they see it.

__________________ Dec 5, 2011 post:

On Thursday, December 1, 2011, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, on behalf of the Program Administrators (California Center for Sustainable Energy, Southern California Edison Company, Southern California Gas Company) submitted a request for an extension of time to reply to the protests received on a joint IOU advice filing:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company: Advice 3253-G/3940-E California Center for Sustainable Energy: Advice 24 Southern California Edison Company : Advice 2651-E Southern California Gas Company: Advice 4292

The filing in question provides details regarding how utility program administrators will implement the new Self Generation Incentive Program rules. Due to the complex nature and amount of protests received, Energy Division granted this request on Dec 5.

The new due date for IOU responses to protests is December 19 th , 2011.

Note that this extension does not affect the status of SGIP, which will continue to accept applications.

________________ Nov 20, 2011 post:

CPUC President Michael Peevey issued a Proposed Decision (PD) Nov 10 setting forth budgets for 2012 and 2013 for the Self Generation Incentive Program. The decision adopts an annual budget of $83 million for the SGIP for 2012, and an interim budget of $41.5 million for 2013.

The Commission will consider whether to augment the 2013 budget and a budget for 2014 after review by the Commission’s Energy Division of SGIP participation, spending patterns, and carryover funding. Comments on the PD are due Nov 30, and reply comments are due Dec 5.

On Nov 7, CPUC staff analyst Neal Reardon ( (415) 703-5274 ) notified parties on the service list that the Self Generation Incentive Program - which has been suspended since January - will resume accepting new applications on Tuesday, November 15 th .

Please note that you must use the new application forms to be eligible for incentives. These forms will be posted by utility Program Administrators on their respective websites. You can download the forms here:

For PG&E: http://www.pge.com/mybusiness/energysavingsrebates/selfgenerationincentive/handbook/

For SCE: http://www.sce.com/sgip

For CCSE: https://energycenter.org/index.php/incentive-programs/self-generation-incentive-program/sgip-documents/application-forms

For SoCalGas: http://www.socalgas.com/innovation/self-generation/

Applications will be reviewed in order by the date they are received. However, applications received in the morning of a given day will not receive preference over those received in the afternoon.

Earlier the same day, the Program Administrators jointly filed an Advice Letter proposing revisions to the SGIP Handbook to implement Decision 11-09-015.

That Advice Letter is available here: http://www.pge.com/nots/rates/tariffs/tm2/pdf/GAS_3253-G.pdf

The advice filing seeks to revise sections of the SGIP Program Handbook to implement D.11-09-015 from Sept 8, 2011, and to make other necessary updates and revisions. Since the changes will not be approved when the SGIP begins to accept 2011 applications, the PAs requested that the proposed revisions be applicable to all applications received in 2011. The Handbook modifications: ♦ Replace the current upfront, capacity-based incentive mechanism with a Performance-Based Incentive (“PBI”) mechanism to ensure long-term performance of projects that receive SGIP incentives. ♦ Adopt a hybrid incentive structure with a 50% up-front incentive and 50% as PBI payments over a 5-year period for projects over 30kW. ♦ Maintain the current tiered incentive structure. PBI payments will be reduced or eliminated in years that cumulative GHG reductions do not occur. ♦ Include new metering and monitoring protocols. ♦ Various other changes which the PAs characterize as clarifications.

________________ Nov 5, 2011 post:

Comments on the SGIP budgets resulting from the passage of AB 1150 were due Oct 28. SCE and PG&E were fully supportive of the proposed $83 million per year SGIP budget, which is an extension of the amount set in 2008. CCSE, SDG&E, and SoCal Gas, filing jointly, were similarly disposed. The Division of Ratepayer Advocates and The Utility Reform Network filed in opposition to further collections of $83 million per year, citing unspent funds already collected and unused. TURN suggests $30 million per year would be adequate.

Staff will be conducting a webinar Nov 14 from 2-4 on the 2010 Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Impact Evaluation.

This webinar will cover the performance of various technologies supported through SGIP, and will track their contributions towards state goals.

For the first time, this report will also evaluate performance metrics necessary to ensure greenhouse gas reductions. For example, how much waste heat does a fuel cell need to capture to be GHG reducing? Also, this report will compare performance in SGIP facilities with other state-supported CHP programs such as NYSERDA.

_________________ Oct 20, 2011 post:

On Oct 10, the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) Program Administrators (PAs), filed: CCSE Advice Letter 22; PG&E Advice Letters 3245-G and 3923-E; SCE Advice Letter 2637-E; and SCG Advice Letter 4286, an advice filing to propose revisions to the SGIP Handbook to implement Decision 11-09-015, propose improvements to the Waste Heat Utilization Worksheet, propose a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate testing protocol for electric-only technologies that consume fossil fuels, and propose guidelines to protect against entities creating different governance structures to be able to achieve more funding than the capped amount under the SGIP.

Attachments A-D [including (A) Revised SGIP Program Handbook (Redline Version); (B) Revised Waste Heat Utilization Worksheet; (C) Proposed GHG emission rate testing protocol for electric-only technologies that consume fossil fuels; and (D) Proposed guidelines to protect against entities creating different governance structures to be able to achieve more funding than the capped amount], may be viewed at: https://energycenter.org/index.php/incentive-programs/self-generation-incentive-program .

ALJ Duda issued a Ruling Oct 19 requesting comments on the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) budget for 2012, 2013 and 2014 in order to implement Assembly Bill (AB) 1150 (Stats. 2011, Ch. 310). AB 1150 extends the authority of the Commission to authorize annual collections for SGIP through December 31, 2014 at a rate not more than the amount authorized for SGIP in the 2008 calendar year. The Ruling proposes to authorize Self Generation Incentive Program collections of $83 million per year, allocated across the four relevant utilities as set forth below, for the years 2012, 2013, and 2014.

[table id=10 /]

Comments on the ALJ Ruling are due no later than October 28, 2011.

Pursuant to Decision 11-09-015 , which modified the Self Generation Incentive Program to comply with Senate Bill 412, the Commission welcomes informal comments on the implementation of warranty requirements.

Please note that the discussion is not whether or not warranties will be required, but how this requirement can best be implemented. As noted in Attachment A of the Decision, a ten-year warranty is required for participation in SGIP. Ordering Paragraph 1 of that Decision (page 70) states:

1. The program administrators for the Self-Generation Incentive Program shall implement the changes to the program as summarized in Attachment A.

Energy Division welcomes comments on the following: · Should warranty requirements differ by technology type (e.g. wind turbines, fuel cells)? · Should warranty requirements differ by fuel type (e.g. natural gas, biogas)? · Should warranty requirements differ by class (e.g. emerging, conventional)? · Should warranty requirements differ by capacity? · Should warranty costs be included in total project costs? · Are there any other points of consideration the Commission and Program Administrators should take into account when implementing warranty requirements? These informal comments do not need to be sent to the docket office. Instead, please send them to neal.reardon@cpuc.ca.gov .

Please submit comments by 5 PM on Friday October 28 th , 2011 .

________________ Sept 20, 2011 post:

At its Sept 8 meeting, the CPUC adopted Decision 11-09-015 "Modifying the Self-Generation Incentive Program and Implementing Senate Bill 412."

The Decision modifies the eligibility criteria for participation in the program, incentive amounts and payment structures for eligible technologies, metering and warranty requirements, and budget allocation among eligible technologies.

Eligibility for participation in the SGIP will now be based on greenhouse gas emissions reductions. SGIP technologies that achieve reductions of greenhouse gas emissions pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 will be eligible to participate in the SGIP. The eligible technologies include wind turbines, fuel cells, gas turbines, micro-turbines and internal-combustion engines, organic rankine cycle/ waste heat capture, combined heat and power (CHP), advanced energy storage, and pressure reduction turbines.

Eligible technologies will receive up-front and performance-based incentives (PBI). However, PBI payments will be reduced or eliminated in years that a project does not achieve cumulative greenhouse gas reductions.

The incentives will apply only to the portion of the generation that serves a project's on-site electric load. The maximum total incentives per watt of capacity that each technology may receive are shown in Table 1 below:

Technology Type Incentive ($/W) Renewable and Waste Heat Capture Wind Turbine $1.25 Bottoming-Cycle CHP $1.25 Pressure Reduction Turbine $1.25 Conventional Fuel-Based CHP Internal Combustion Engine - CHP $0.50 Microturbine - CHP $0.50 Gas Turbine - CHP $0.50 Emerging technologies Advanced Energy Storage $2.00 Biogas $2.00 Fuel Cell - CHP or Electric Only $2.25 The changes in this decision will only apply to SGIP projects going forward. In other words, existing SGIP projects will continue to receive the same incentives they were receiving prior to this decision and will continue to operate under the existing SGIP rules. Eligible projects that were completed between January 1, 2011 and the effective date of this decision shall be subject to the program rules that were in place during that time.

The SGIP PAs will file Tier 2 advice letters proposing handbook revisions necessary to implement this decision. The SGIP is currently suspended. Upon approval of the advice letters, the SGIP suspension will be lifted and the PAs will resume accepting reservation requests for the SGIP.

_________________________ Aug 5, 2011 post:

President Peevey and Comissioner Sandoval will be conducting an all-party meeting regarding the Proposed Decision. See a separate posting for the agenda. Also, see the Energy Calendar.

____________________ July 20, 2011 post:

On July 19, 2011 Commission President Michael Peevey issued a Proposed Decision (PD) regarding the Self Generation Incentive Program. The Commission’s PD modifies the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) to conform the program to Senate Bill (SB) 412 (Stats. 2009, ch. 182). In addition, the commission proposes to modify several aspects of the SGIP to improve program outcomes and facilitate program implementation. Among other issues, they propose to modify the eligibility criteria for participation in the program, incentive amounts and payment structures for eligible technologies, metering and warranty requirements, and budget allocation among eligible technologies. Attachment A to the PD is a summary of all the program changes.

Eligibility for participation in the SGIP will now be based on greenhouse gas emissions reductions. SGIP technologies that achieve reductions of greenhouse gas emissions pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Division 25.5 (commencing with Section 38500) of the Health and Safety Code) will be eligible to participate in the SGIP. The eligible technologies include wind turbines, fuel cells, gas turbines, micro-turbines and internal combustion (IC) engines, organic rankine cycle/ bottom-cycle combined heat and power (CHP), advanced energy storage, and pressure reduction turbines.

Eligible technologies will receive up-front and performance-based incentives. The maximum total incentive per watt of capacity that each technology may receive as up-front incentive are shown in Table 1 below:

[table id=7 /]

The changes in this decision will only apply to SGIP projects going forward. In other words, existing SGIP projects will continue to receive the same incentives they were receiving prior to this decision and will continue to operate under the existing SGIP rules. Projects on the program administrators’ (PAs) waitlist will receive incentives according to existing program rules, but SGIP projects that obtain reservations after the effective date of this decision will be subject to the new rates, payment structures, and other operational requirements adopted here. Eligible projects that were completed between January 1, 2011 and the effective date of this decision shall be subject to the program rules that were in place during that time.

Within 30 days of the effective date of this decision, the SGIP PAs are ordered to file Tier 2 advice letters proposing handbook revisions necessary to implement this decision. The SGIP is currently suspended. Upon approval of the advice letters, the SGIP suspension will be lifted and the PAs will resume accepting reservation requests for the SGIP.

Opening comments, which shall not exceed 25 pages, are due August 8, 2011. Reply comments, which shall not exceed 5 pages, are due August 15.

The 2010 Self Generation Incentive Program Impact Evaluation is complete. New to this year’s report are recommendations for achieving greenhouse gas reductions through combined heat power applications. https://www.itron.com/na/PublishedContent/SGIP_2010_Impact_Eval_Report.pdf

__________________________ May 5, 2011 post:

On April 21, ALJ Mariam Ebke issued a Ruling requesting comments from interested stakeholders on a revised proposal by Staff of the Commission’s Energy Division (Staff Proposal, Part II) regarding modifications to the Self-Generation Incentive Program. Parties were requested to file comments on Staff Proposal, Part II no later than May 2, 2011. Parties may file reply comments no later than May 9, 2011. Supplemental comments on Itron's cost effectiveness report are due May 11, replies May 17.

_________________________ end of May 5, 2011 post. Older posts:

On Feb 10, Commission President Peevey issued a Ruling suspending the SGIP program until further notice. In that Ruling, he directs the Program Administrators (PAs) (PG&E, SCE, SCG, and CCSE) to suspend accepting new reservation requests for SGIP projects as of January 1, 2011. This means that the PAs shall not process any applications received on or after January 1, 2011 and shall return all such applications to the applicants. The PAs shall continue to processapplications and fund projects whose applications were received prior to January 1, 2011, but will not entertain requests for increases in funding. In discussing his reasons, the Commissioner found merit in the PA's argument that suspension of the program will allow time for the PUC to consider and adopt new rules for the SGIP program, pursuant to SB 412 (2009), which would allow a broader array of technologies into the program, based on their GHG emissions.

On Dec 22, PG&E, on behalf of the Program Administrators (PA) of the Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) filed a motion requesting approval to temporarily suspend accepting any new SGIP applications, effective December 22, 2010, until the decision implementing SB 412 is approved by the Commission and takes effect. Unless a moratorium on new applications is put in place, their motion says, projects of currently eligible technologies could consume all available SGIP funding – and 2011 is the last year for new funds. If this occurred, the CPUC would be in a position of voting out a decision in March of 2011 that would implement a new, expanded SGIP consistent with SB 412 that had virtually no funds for incentives. Therefore, the SGIP PAs feel that time is of the essence to act immediately to preserve funding for the 2011 SGIP program that will implement SB 412. They present a budget showing over $165 million remaining.

The PAs intention is to not process any 2011 applications until the SB 412 Decision is voted out and the 2011 SGIP Handbook and forms are published.

On Jan 6, three entities filed responses: CA Energy Storage Assn (CESA); Bloom Energy; and UTC Power. Bloom and UTC Power, who both have enjoyed some success in developing projects and in receiving SGIP incentives, point out the detrimental effect such an action would have on projects in progress, and the regulatory uncertainty created that would have an overall chilling effect on the market, contrary to CPUC and legislative intent. CESA, on the other hand, whose members have enjoyed relatively little success so far in the SGIP program, welcome the moratorium, in order to give their members more time to participate before the money is all gone.

On October 11, 2009, the Governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 412 (Stats. 2009, ch. 182) into law. SB 412 authorizes the CPUC, in consultation with the California Air Resources Board (ARB), to determine eligible technologies for the SGIP based on the requirement that they "achieve reductions of greenhouse gas emissions pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006."

Itron’s Cost-Benefit model, which evaluates distributed generation projects from both a participant and societal point of view, is now available for download at: http://capabilities.itron.com/downloads/temp/SGIPce/SGIPce_Beta_v1_0.zip

CPUC staff conducted a CSI/DG Cost-Effectiveness Workshop Aug 4. On their contractor E3's website , you can find the updated PowerPoint presentation used in the workshop and the individual installation pro forma tool.

ALJ Duda issued a Ruling Sept 27 modifying dates for compliance filings. In Decision (D.) 09-12-047,the Commission directed the Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) administrators to obtain an independent audit of SGIP ratepayer collections and submit it to Energy Division by October 1, 2010. This ruling grants SCE’s request on behalf of the SGIP administrators and changes the deadline in Ordering Paragraph 3(d) of D.09-12-047 from October 1, 2010 to January 10, 2011.

ALJ Ebke issued a Ruling Sept 30 releasing a staff Proposal to modify SGIP in response to SB 412(2009). SB 412 required that if technologies could demonstrate that they would emit less GHG than the grid electricity they replace, they would be eligible for SGIP. The staff proposal found that most technologies operating on fossil fuels, except gas turbines, would not be eligible, but in CHP mode they would. A workshop was held to discuss the issues raised in the staff proposal on November 1 st. The staff proposal and workshop agenda are available here . Commissioner Peevey and ALJs Ebke and Duda issued a Scoping Memo and Ruling Nov 9 defining the scope of the proceeding, setting forth the procedural schedule, assigning the principal hearing officers, and finalizing the categorization of this proceeding. The Ruling divides the proceeding into three phases. The schedule will be as follows:

[table id=43 /]

Due to the overall complexity of Itron’s Self Generation Incentive Program Cost-Effectiveness model “SGIPce”, as well as technical difficulties experienced by some parties, the CPUC and Itron chose to extend the informal comment period.

Resolution E-4351, which approves the use of $345,000 of funds previously allocated to the 2003 “Rebuild a Greener San Diego Program” to serve as matching funds for the installations of an advanced energy storage system to be coupled with a photovoltaic system, has been approved.

A complete text of the final Resolution may be found here: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_RESOLUTION//125060.htm

Over 11K Stories!

| Independently Powered Energy News

Self Generation Incentive Program

dgrandy

Related Posts

NRC focuses on Diablo closure, not extension, CPUC staff tout demand flexibility potential, New transmission coming to AZ-CA desert

Silicon Valley CCA to Provide Google 100% Clean Energy All Day, Every Day

Offshore wind & green h2 advance, utility home demand response programs need improvement, zinc batteries show promise

Electric System Reliability