Energy Efficiency
AB 154 (Nakanishi – Sacramento) was introduced January 18, 2007. This bill would, under both laws, for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2008, allow a refundable credit to a qualified taxpayer, as defined, for the construction of, or acquiring of, a qualified energy efficient home, as provided, to deduct an amount equal to the cost of that building, subject to specified restrictions.
AB 527 (Torrico – Alameda) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would require the CA Energy Commission ( CEC), in partnership with the Department of General Services (DGS), to develop and adopt, on or before January 1, 2009, a state plan to include energy efficient technology in state-operated facilities. It would require the DGS, with the cooperation of the CEC, to begin implementation of the state plan upon its adoption and report to the Legislature, on or before January 1, 2011, on the progress of the implementation of the state plan and its effectiveness in improving the energy efficiency of state-operated facilities.
AB 609 (Eng – Los Angeles) was introduced February 21, 2007. Existing law authorizes the State Public Works Board to acquire and to engage in the construction of, cogeneration equipment, alternative energy equipment, or conservation measures, and any combination thereof, and to enter into energy service contracts at any structure, building, facility, site, or work used, owned, or acquired by state agencies. Such activities must provide cost savings to the state in each year during the term of any revenue bonds, notes, or energy service contracts issued or entered into pursuant to the act or other specified provisions of law. This bill would instead require the equipment, conservation measures, or energy service contracts to be anticipated to provide costs savings to the state within 15 years.
AB 722 (Levine – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would prohibit on and after January 1, 2012, the sale of general service incandescent lamps in the state.
AB 882 (Hernandez – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. The Sales and Use Tax Law imposes a tax on the gross receipts from the sale in this state of, or the storage, use, or other consumption in this state of, tangible personal property. That law provides various exemptions from that tax. This bill would also exempt from that tax during a qualified period, which would be defined as the first week of October of each year beginning in 2008, energy efficient products, as defined.
AB 1103 (Saldana – San Diego) was introduced February 23, 2007. AB 1103 would declare the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to establish a California specific benchmarking system, available to all commercial buildings in the state, which would provide energy consumption information to commercial building owners and operators in order to compare their building's performance to that of similar buildings.
AB 1109 (Huffman – Marin) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would enact the California Lighting Efficiency and Toxics Reduction Act and would require the Department of Toxic Substance Control to prescribe, by regulation, schedules for reducing the maximum levels of mercury and lead, per lumen, in general purpose lights, as defined, sold or offered for sale in this state. Every manufacturer of general purpose lights sold in this state and containing hazardous materials would be required by July 1, 2009, to ensure a system is in place for collection and recycling of end-of-life general purpose lights generated in this state, and submit to the department a collection, recycling, and management plan fulfilling certain requirements, by July 1, 2008.
AB 1613 (Blakeslee – San Luis Obispo) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would enact the Waste Heat and Carbon Emissions Reduction Act. It would provide that it is the policy of the state that the conversion of waste heat to electricity or other useful energy applications be treated as an efficiency measure for purposes of the loading order. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to obtain 5,000 megawatts of new electrical generation by the year 2015 by achieving improved efficiencies utilizing waste heat through combined heat and power systems.
SB 332 (Corbett – Alameda) was introduced February 20, 2007. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation related to energy efficiency standards for computers, networks, televisions, and other appliances to increase the energy efficiency in these appliances.
Renewables / Nuclear
AB 94 (Levine – Van Nuys) was introduced on December 20, 2006. Existing law expresses the intent of the Legislature, in establishing the Renewable Energy Resources Program, to increase the amount of electricity generated per year from eligible renewable energy resources is increased to an amount that equals at least 20 percent of the total electricity sold to retail customers in California per year by December 31, 2010. This bill would revise the intent language so that the amount of electricity generated per year from eligible renewable energy resources is increased to an amount that equals at least 33 percent of the total electricity sold to retail customers in California per year by December 31, 2020.
AB 292 (Blakeslee – San Luis Obispo) was introduced February 9, 2007. The California Emergency Services Act provides for the assessment of certain state agency costs on utilities operating certain nuclear power plants, and the deposit of those moneys into, and the appropriation and allocation of moneys from, the Nuclear Planning Assessment Special Account. These provisions become inoperative on July 1, 2009, and are repealed on January 1, 2010. This bill would extend the inoperative date of these provisions to July 1, 2019, and the repeal date to January 1, 2020.
AB 532 (Wolk – Solano) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would require the Department of General Services to ensure that solar energy equipment is installed no later than January 1, 2009, on all state buildings and state parking facilities, and state-operated swimming pools that are heated with fossil fuels or electricity, where feasible.
AB 578 (Blakeslee – San Luis Obispo) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would require the CA Energy Commission, on or before January 1, 2009, to submit a report to the Legislature and the Governor, on the impacts of renewable energy generation on the state's distribution and transmission grid.
AB 719 (DeVore – Orange) was introduced February 22, 2007. The bill would repeal that prohibition regarding permitting and certifying nuclear fission thermal power plants, along with certain other duties of the commission with regard to nuclear fission thermal power plants.
AB 809 (Blakeslee – San Luis Obispo) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would recast the provisions pertaining to the eligibility of electricity generated from hydroelectric facilities to meet the renewables portfolio standard. The bill would provide that a small hydroelectric generation facility of 30 megawatts or less that commences operation after December 31, 2005, is an eligible renewable energy resource if meet certain criteria.
AB 811 (Levine – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would authorize a credit against those taxes for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2007, and before January 1, 2012, for the costs paid or incurred by a taxpayer for the construction of an eligible renewable resource.
AB 837 (Levine – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would additionally require the governing board of a local publicly owned electric utility (municipal utility) to annually report the proportion of electricity from eligible renewable energy resources provided to customers of the utility from an electricity generating facility owned and operated by the utility.
AB 940 (Krekorian – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to promote solar energy usage in this state.
AB 946 (Krekorian – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would amend the definition of an “electric generation facility” for purposes of renewable portfolio standard eligibility to require that the facility be owned and operated by a public water or wastewater agency that is a retail customer of an electrical corporation, that the facility have an effective capacity of not more than one megawatt, and that the facility is located on land owned or under the control of the public water or wastewater agency.
AB 1064 (Lieber – Santa Clara) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would except from the definition of a heat corporation, a person employing Solar Thermal distributed technology, as defined, for the production or generation of heat for its own use or the use of its tenants or for sale to a heat corporation or state or local public agency. It would also require the CA Public Utilities Commission, in consultation with the CA Energy Commission, to administer, until January 1, 2012, a self-generation incentive program for distributed generation resources as originally established by the commission, subject to certain air emissions and efficiency standards and with the exception of solar electrical generation technologies, which are to be separately administered pursuant to the California Solar Initiative. The bill would make Solar Thermal distributed technologies that displace usage of natural gas or electricity eligible for the self-generation incentive program, as determined by the commission, and would require that any incentives authorized by the commission be performance-based so that incentives are earned based on the actual energy savings.
AB 1428 (Galgiani – Merced) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would require electrical corporations to provide eligible biomass conversion customer-generators with net energy metering, under a pilot program. The bill would prescribe conditions under which these customers may participate in the pilot program established by the bill and would require the electrical corporation to file a standard tariff providing for net energy metering for eligible biomass conversion customer-generators. The bill would require the commission, in consultation with the CA Air Resources Board, to report certain information relative to the pilot program to the Legislature by December 31, 2010.
AB 1451 (Leno – San Francisco) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would modify this exclusion to instead specify that an active solar energy system used in the production of electricity, in the case where the electricity is transmitted to a utility for inclusion in the utility's transmission or distribution network, includes all equipment and property, other than land, used up to the point of interconnection with the utility transmission or distribution network. This bill would also specify, for purposes of this exclusion, “the construction or addition of an active solar energy system” includes the construction of an active solar energy system in a newly constructed single-family residence that is offered for sale and for which the owner-builder incorporated an active solar energy system in the initial construction of the residence and the owner-builder does not intend to occupy the residence. This bill would require the State Board of Equalization to prescribe the manner and form for a taxpayer to claim this exclusion. This bill would require the county assessor to reduce the base year value of these residences by the value of the active solar energy system.
AB 1470 (Huffman – Marin) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would establish the Solar Heating and Efficiency Act of 2007. It would make findings and declarations of the Legislature relating to the promotion of solar hot water systems and other technologies that reduce natural gas demand. The bill would define several terms for purposes of the act and require the CA Public Utilities Commission to create and administer, not later than July 1, 2008, a program to provide incentives for installation of 500,000 Solar Thermal systems in homes and businesses throughout the state by 2017.
SB 324 (Migden – Marin) was introduced February 16, 2007. For purposes of CA Solar Initiative eligibility, this bill would expand that definition of low-income residential housing to include residential housing that is occupied by individuals eligible for the commission's California Alternative Rates for Energy (CARE) program or the Low-Income Energy Efficiency (LIEE) program.
SB 410 (Simitian – San Mateo) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would require the CA Public Utilities Commission, in making awards for the multiyear, consumer-based program to foster the development of emerging renewable technologies in distributed generation applications, to complete its determination regarding awarding of supplemental energy payments no later than 60 days after receiving the request for payment.
SB 411 (Simitian – San Mateo) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would prohibit the CPUC from requiring a retail seller with 20% of retail sales procured from eligible renewable energy resources in any year to increase its procurement of renewable energy resources in the following year, unless the CPUC determines that additional procurement of eligible renewable energy resources, of up to 33% of retail sales, would facilitate achievement of the greenhouse gas emissions limit adopted pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.
SB 451 (Kehoe – San Diego) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would require the CA Public Utilities Commission to require each electrical corporation and gas corporation to develop and implement an energy conservation investment initiative that consists of all cost-effective, reliable, and feasible direct investments in equipment and practices that reduce the use of energy. It would provide that the investment made by an electrical corporation or gas corporation pursuant to an approved initiative is recoverable in rates, including a reasonable return on invested capital, as determined by the commission.
SB 463 (Negrete McLeod – Los Angeles) was introduced February 21, 2007. Under the bill, an electrical corporation would retain any excess kilowatt hours generated if the electrical corporation and the eligible biogas digester customer-generator have entered into a contract for the purchase and sale of excess electricity generated during periods if the eligible biogas digester customer-generator is a net electricity producer. If there is no contract, the eligible biogas digester customer-generator would not be owed any compensation for those excess kilowatt hours.
SB 660 (Perata – Alameda) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to reform the awarding of supplemental energy payments pursuant to the RPS program to accomplish certain objectives.
SB 1036 (Perata – Alameda) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would, effective July 1, 2008, repeal certain provisions providing for the New Renewable Resources Account within the Renewable Resource Trust Fund. It would delete the requirement that the CA Energy Commission award production incentives and allocate and award supplemental energy payments to eligible renewable energy resources to cover above-market costs of renewable energy. The bill would require the CA Energy Commission to terminate all production incentives awarded prior to January 1, 2002, from the New Renewable Resources Account, unless the renewable energy project began generating electricity by January 1, 2007. The CA Energy Commission would be required by March 1, 2008, to transfer to retail sellers serving customers subject to the renewable energy public goods charge the remaining unencumbered funds in the New Renewable Resources Account, to be allocated amongst retail sellers on the basis of annual retail sales of electricity. The bill would require each retail seller to refund to customers all funds received from the Energy Commission within 180 days of receipt unless directed to provide such refunds on a different schedule authorized by the PUC. The bill would place certain cost limitations upon the requirements placed upon electrical corporations pursuant to the renewables portfolio standard. The bill would make other conforming changes.
Green Buildings
AB 35 (Ruskin – San Mateo) was introduced on December 4, 2006. AB 35 would enact the Sustainable Building Act of 2007 and require the California Integrated Waste Management Board, by July 1, 2009, to adopt regulations for sustainable building standards for the construction or renovation of state buildings. Sustainable building practices utilize energy, water, and materials efficiently throughout the building's life cycle. This substantially reduces the costs and environmental impacts associated with long-term building operations without compromising building performance or the needs of future generations.
AB 155 (Nakanishi – Sacramento) was introduced January 18, 2007. This bill would, under both laws, for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2008, allow a refundable credit to a qualified taxpayer, as defined, for the construction of, or acquiring of, a qualified energy efficient home, as provided.
AB 888 (Lieu – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would require state agencies with responsibility for proposing building standards to the commission to develop those proposed building standards to ensure that green building elements are integrated into the standards. The bill would define green building elements for these purposes and make legislative findings and declarations.
AB 1058 (Laird) requires the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), in collaboration with the California Buildings Standards Commission (CBSC), to adopt the best practices and buildings standards related to green buildings. AB 1058 also directs HCD to write new building codes by July 1, 2009, requiring efficient homes.
AB 1065 (Lieber – Santa Clara) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would require the commission to adopt standards that would reduce the energy consumption per gross square foot of floor space of new residential and new nonresidential buildings, from offsite sources, on a specified schedule using the standards adopted in 2003 as the baseline for comparison purposes. The commission would be required to review and or approve one or more computer programs for use in demonstrating compliance with the commission prescribed energy standards.
Transportation
AB 99 (Feuer – Hollywood) was introduced on December 21, 2006. AB 99 provides for the advancement of alternative fuel vehicles. Specifically, AB 99 will declare the intent of the Legislature to ensure that, by January 1, 2012, no less than 50 percent of all new cars made available for sale in California are powered by clean alternative fuels.
AB 118 (Nunez – Los Angeles) was introduced on January 9, 2007. AB 118 would declare legislative intent to provide ongoing funding for alternative fuel research, development, and deployment in order to advance the state's leadership in clean technologies, meet the state's clean air and greenhouse gas emission reduction standards, develop public-private partnerships, and ensure a reliable fuel supply.
AB 493 (Ruskin – Santa Clara) was introduced February 20, 2007. This bill would require the California Air Resources Board ( CARB) to create and implement a clean vehicle incentive program to provide rebates to, and require surcharges from, purchasers of new motor vehicles based on greenhouse gas emissions. The bill would create the Clean Vehicle Incentive Account to be administered by CARB in consultation with the State Board of Equalization.
AB 746 (Krekorian – Los Angeles) was introduced on February 22, 2007. This bill would require the commission, by July 1, 2008, and in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, the State Air Resources Board, air quality management districts, air pollution control districts, electrical corporations, gas corporations, the motor vehicle industry, and the natural gas vehicle and transportation fuel industries, to develop and implement policies and programs that are in the interests of ratepayers, to promote the development and increased use of natural gas as an alternative transportation fuel.
AB 747 (Levine – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would require the state board to reduce the carbon intensity of the state's transportation fuels by at least 10% by 2020, and would require the state board to implement a low-carbon fuel standard applicable to refiners, blenders, producers, and importers of transportation fuel. Refiners, blenders, producers, and importers of transportation fuel would be allowed to meet the standard through market-based methods. Because a violation of the low-carbon fuel standard would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating new crime.
AB 1077 (Lieber – Santa Clara) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would enact the California Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Leadership Act of 2007. It would establish a 19-member California Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Coordinating Council to coordinate and collaborate on plug-in hybrid electric vehicle-related activities, identify existing and potential barriers to the successful development and commercialization of plug-in hybrid vehicles, assess current and proposed activities related to plug-in hybrid vehicles, and describe the extent to which these will address identified barriers, recommend and prioritize additional work, activities, research, development and demonstration, and programs that will contribute to the resolution of identified barriers. The bill would establish a goal for the council to have at a minimum 1,000,000 plug-in hybrid vehicles on California roads by 2015.
AB 1306 (Huff – Orange County) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would reduce the portion of gasoline sales tax revenues that are deposited in the Public Transportation Account by eliminating what is commonly known as the “spillover” formula. The bill would thereby increase the revenues from the sales tax on gasoline that are deposited in the General Fund, and by operation of Article XIX B of the Constitution, would require those revenues to be subsequently transferred to the Transportation Investment Fund.
SB 70 (Flores – Fresno) was introduced January 9, 2007. This bill would specify standards for biodiesel and biodiesel blends and for retail sale of such blends. This bill would also create a voluntary CO2 labeling program for petroleum, biodiesel, and finished fuel blends containing biodiesel in order to provide distributors and retailers of petroleum, biodiesel, and biodiesel blended fuels the ability to voluntarily display a pump or tank label displaying recognized CO2 lifecycle reductions and fuel efficiency.
SB 71 (Flores – Fresno) was introduced January 9, 2007. This bill would require all vehicles owned or leased by the State of California, by a city, county, or city and county, or by a mass transit district, that use diesel fuel to instead use B20 biodiesel fuel or a higher blend of biodiesel, as specified. The bill would require the State Air Resources Board to establish a program to implement and monitor these requirements.
SB 72 (Florez – Fresno) was introduced January 9, 2007. This bill would require a school district to use a biodiesel fuel blend of B20 or higher to operate all its own diesel-powered school buses and those operated for a district by another entity through contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2008. The bill would require the State Air Resources Board to implement and administer this section.
SB 73 (Florez – Fresno) was introduced January 9, 2007. This bill would allow for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2008 a refundable tax credit in an amount equal to a specified amount for each gallon of biodiesel fuel produced or manufactured by a qualified producer at any facility located in this state. The credit would be reimbursed on a quarterly basis.
SB 74 (Florez – Fresno) was introduced January 9, 2007. This bill would exempt from sales and use taxes the gross receipts from the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption of, tangible personal property purchased for use by a qualified person in the manufacturing, processing, or production of biodiesel fuel, as defined. This bill would also exempt from those taxes the gross receipts from the sale of, and the storage, use, or other consumption of, biodiesel fuel, as defined. These exemptions would be in effect from January 1, 2008, through January 1, 2013. This bill would authorize a personal income tax credit for taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2008, and ending on or before January 1, 2013, in a yet to be determined percentage of the qualified costs paid or incurred with respect to the manufacturing, production, delivery, or sale of biodiesel fuel, as defined.
SB 75 (Florez – Fresno) was introduced January 9, 2007. This bill would require any vehicle purchased or leased by the State of California that uses diesel fuel to be a warranty-certified unit that uses at least B20 biodiesel fuel.
SB 140 (Kehoe – San Diego) was introduced January 25, 2007. This bill would require all diesel fuel sold or offered for sale in the state for use in internal combustion engines to contain at least 2 percent renewable diesel fuel, as defined, no later than one year after specified finding is made by the state board, and, no later than 2 years after the implementation of the 2 percent standard, would require all diesel fuel sold or offered for sale in the state for use in internal combustion engines to contain at least 5 percent renewable diesel fuel.
SB 494 (Kehoe – San Diego) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would require the CA Air Resources Board, by June 30, 2009, in partnership with the CA Energy Commission, and in consultation with the State Water Resources Control Board, the Department of Food and Agriculture, and other relevant state agencies, to develop and adopt regulations that would become operative no later than January 1, 2010, to ensure that an unspecified percentage of new passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks sold in California each year are clean alternative vehicles by January 1, 2015. The bill also would ensure that commencing January 1, 2020, 1/2 of new passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks sold in California each year are clean alternative vehicles. The bill would require the state board to submit a report to the Legislature on the progress passenger vehicle and light-duty truck manufacturers have made in meeting these requirements, the progress the state has made in increasing the use of alternative fuels and reducing the state's dependence on imported petroleum and petroleum fuels, and any improvements in public health and the environment attributable to the use of clean alternative fuels, as specified.
Climate Change
AB 6 (Houston – Livermore) was introduced on December 4, 2006. The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 ( AB 32 in the 2005-2006 legislative session) requires the State Air Resources Board to adopt a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions levels in 1990 to be achieved by 2020. Additionally, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006authorizes the state board to adopt market-based compliance mechanisms. Rather than authorizing, AB 6 would require the state board to adopt market-based compliance mechanisms.
AB 109 (Nunez – Los Angeles) was introduced January 5, 2007.This bill would require the California Air Resources Board to report to the Legislature annually on the status and progress of implementing the Global Warming Act of 2006.
AB 114 (Blakeslee – San Luis Obispo) was introduced on January 9, 2007. This bill will require the Energy Commission to develop, on or before January 1, 2010, a program to facilitate and encourage the implementation of cost effective containment, scrubbing, and capture technologies to decrease carbon dioxide emissions from the industrial process.
AB 233 (Jones – Sacramento) was introduced on January 30, 2007. This bill would increase the maximum penalties and types of violation of air pollution laws. It would also create a website that would post information on air quality violations
AB 242 (Blakeslee – San Luis Obispo) was introduced February 1, 2007. This bill states the legislative intent that by 2020 statewide greenhouse gas emission levels be lowered to 1990 levels. Also, entities that voluntarily reduce their emissions by January 1, 2012, receive credit for early action. This act also encourages the creation of emissions credits for entities to purchase that have tried other methods of reduction already.
AB 255 (De Leon – Los Angeles) was introduced on February 5, 2007. This bill would create the Clean Air and Energy Independence Fund, and would continuously appropriate money to provide incentives for alternative fuel and alternative fuel vehicles by increasing the smog abatement fee from $12 to $16. The additional $4 increase would be provided to the Clean Air and Energy Independence Fund.
AB 294 (Adams – San Bernardino) was introduced February 9, 2007. This bill would declare legislative intent to enact legislation to identify the sources, and reduce the levels, of manganese particulate matter in the air.
AB 631 (Horton – San Diego) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would require the CA Air Resources Board adopt regulations to require that, on and after January 1, 2010, all new fueling stations constructed in this state be able to provide E85 fuel, as defined, to vehicles that use that fuel.
AB 657 (Jeffries – Riverside) was introduced on February 21, 2007. This bill would make a technical, non-substantive change to these provisions of law pertaining to CARB's role in implementing the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.
AB 705 (Huffman – Marin) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would require the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, the California Environmental Protection Agency, and the Resources Agency to prescribe regulations for geologic carbon sequestration projects to provide regulatory guidance for those performing these projects and to minimize the health and safety risks to the public.
AB 785 (Hancock – Contra Costa) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would declare legislative intent to enact legislation to direct the State Air Resources Board and other agencies to develop regulations and enforcement mechanisms that address the impact of urban heat islands on air quality, urban temperatures, and energy demand.
AB 1506 (Arambula – Fresno) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would authorize the creation of a nonprofit corporation to provide direct loans and loan guarantees for capital expenditures that reduce greenhouse gas emissions or generate renewable energy. It would modify the provisions of the Bergeson-Peace Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank Act to authorize a bank, upon appropriation by the Legislature of funds for this purpose, to make loans on capital equipment at interest rates that are below market interest rates if specified requirements are met, including a requirement that the loan applicant use the loan proceeds to purchase or retrofit equipment that will directly result in a measurable reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. This bill would, under both laws, allow a tax credit in an amount equal to 10 percent of the amount paid or incurred during the taxable year for qualified capital equipment certified by the CA Air Resources Board to result in measurable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
SB 23 (Cogdill – Fresno) was introduced on December 4, 2006. This bill will create a program in the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District to remove high polluter vehicles within the district by exchanging them for donated vehicles. The measure will be limited to 200 exchanges annually.
SB 210 (Kehoe – San Diego) was introduced on February 8, 2007. In conjunction with AB 32, The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 requiring in 2020 that state greenhouse gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels, this bill would require the state board to develop and administer a program to reduce the carbon content from transportation fuels sold and refined in California by 10 percent by 2020. The bill would also require the Public Utilities Commission to examine and address how investor-owned utilities can contribute to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector.
SB 247 (Ashburn – Inyo) was introduced February 14, 2007. This bill would make a technical, non substantive change to the provisions of law added by AB 32 (the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006).
Miscellaneous
AJR 3 (Dymally – Los Angeles) was introduced on December 4, 2006. The primary federal program assisting low income families with their energy costs is the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), which provides support both for family utility bill payments and increased energy efficiency through home weatherization programs. Expenditure for LIHEAP is authorized in the amount of $5.1 billion in the federal budget, of which only $2.2 billion has been appropriated by the Congress forFY 2007 - 2008.AJR 3 would call on the President and Congress to increase the federal budget authorization for LIHEAP to $7 billion for FY2007 - 2008 and appropriate that entire amount for distribution to the states.
AB 89 (Garcia – Imperial Valley) was introduced on December 14, 2006. AB 89 will require the Secretary of Business, Transportation and Housing, by January 1, 2010, to prepare and provide to the Legislature a study on the infrastructure development along the border between California and Mexico and any need for alternative financing mechanisms suited to the challenges of the border region. The population along the Mexican border is expected to double by the year 2020. This growth will lead to escalating infrastructure deficits for border communities, including, but not limited to: highway, airport and port facilities, railway, and environmental, water, and energy needs.
AB 625 (Levine – Los Angeles) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would transfer $22,235,000, and all interest generated by an energy settlement agreement with The Williams Companies, Inc. and Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Company, from the Attorney General's Ratepayer Relief Fund to an account in the Special Deposit Fund for use by the University of California, the Hastings College of the Law, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges, for energy conservation projects at eligible institutions.
AB 887 (De La Torre – Los Angeles) was introduced February 22, 2007. This bill would require the inverted rate structure to be consistent with the policies of affordability and conservation.
AB 1223 (Arambula – Fresno) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would require that, for the purposes of determining whether an agricultural customer-generator was a net consumer or a net producer of electricity during a 12-month period, the electrical corporation shall aggregate the electrical load of the agricultural customer under the same ownership located on property adjacent or contiguous to the generation facility. The bill would further require that each aggregated account be billed and measured according to a time-of-use rate schedule.
AB 1517 (Jones – Sacramento) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would require the CA Public Utilities Commission to determine on an annual basis, the state and federal income taxes actually paid to the respective taxing authority by each public utility subject to the ratemaking authority of the commission, and to annually report that information to the Legislature and the Department of Finance. It would require that the commission include in rates only those expenses for income taxes actually paid to state and federal taxing authorities, except that the commission would be authorized to include in rates those income tax reductions representing investment tax credits and accelerated depreciation, to the extent the amount of the credit or depreciation is invested by the public utility in facilities used and useful for providing utility service to customers of the utility.
AB 1532 (Parra - Kings) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would require electrical corporations to provide eligible resource recovery projects with net energy metering, under a pilot program. The bill would prescribe conditions under which these customers may participate in the pilot program established by the bill and would require the electrical corporation to file a standard tariff providing for net energy metering for eligible resource recovery projects. The bill would require the commission, in consultation with the CA Air Resources Board, to report certain information relative to the pilot program to the Legislature by December 31, 2010.
SR 3 (Kehoe – San Diego) was introduced December 4, 2006. SR3 is the same as AJR 3 in the Assembly.
SB 412 (Simitian – San Mateo) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation regarding the sighting and construction of liquefied natural gas facilities on or off the coast of California.
SB 428 (Dutton – Riverside) was introduced February 21, 2007. This bill would require the CA Public Utilities Commission to continue the availability of optional interruptible or curtailable service at least until December 31, 2010, and would prohibit, until after that date, the reduction of the level of the pricing incentive for interruptible or curtailable service below the levels in effect on December 31, 2004.
SB 627 (Dutton – Riverside) was introduced February 22, 2007. The Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act generally provides that the CA Energy Commission has the exclusive power to certify all electric transmission lines and thermal power plants, and related sites, that are regulated pursuant to the act. This bill would make technical, non substantive changes to that provision.
SB 871 (Kehoe – San Diego) was introduced February 23, 2007. This bill would, until January 1, 2012, reinstate expiring provisions for establishing a process for the expedited review of applications to construct and operate thermal power plants and related facilities and for the expedited review of repowering projects.
