Features - Pacific Gas and Electric Company

Report
Rule 21 Interconnection
and
Procurement Opportunities
Webinar
October 9, 2012
Overview
Welcome and Introduction
Nick Chaset,
Governor’s Office
Overview of the Settlement
Rachel Peterson, CPUC
Process
Interconnection Queue Status
Michael Moore, SCE
and Rule 21 Interconnection
Process
SCE’s Transition Plan for Queued Cindy Jacobs, SCE
Projects
Power Procurement Options
Q&A
Janice Wang & Gerry
Torribio , SCE
All
2
Welcome and Introduction
Nick Chaset
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
3
Our Long-term Energy Vision
Transition California’s energy system
to a highly efficient, renewables-based system
and electrify transportation.
4
Elements of this energy transformation
5
1.
2.
3.
4.
Improve energy efficiency and
reduce energy demand
Develop a cleaner, more reliable
energy supply
Implement an efficient and
responsive energy infrastructure
Reduce emissions from the
transportation sector
(Source: California Clean Energy Future)
5
Developing a cleaner energy supply:
Renewables of all sizes are needed
6



Electricity demand will increase with population growth and electric
transportation.
Along with energy demand programs, we will need more power.
 Recent report: State’s solar capacity must increase 12% and its
wind capacity 7.5% every year between now and 2050 to meet
demand increases and our long-term climate goal.
Governor Brown has called for expansion of both large-scale and
small-scale energy.
6
Key Renewable Energy Policies in California
7
1.
2.
3.
4.
33% Renewable Portfolio
Standard (RPS)
12 GW of Distributed
Generation (DG)
Desert Renewable Energy
Conservation Project (DRECP)
CPUC Procurement programs
(IOU procurment, RAM, FIT,
Net Metering, etc)
7
The CPUC’s Actions to Reform the Rule 21
Interconnection Process
Rachel Peterson, Energy Division
California Public Utilities Commission
[email protected]
(415) 703-2872
The Commission’s Actions to Reform the Interconnection Process
September 22, 2011
Order Instituting Rulemaking (R.) 11-09-011: “Ensure that the interconnection
process is timely, non-discriminatory, cost-effective, and transparent.”
Commission staff (Energy and Legal Divisions) initiated a multi-party settlement
process to develop consensus on numerous reforms needed within Rule 21.
March 16, 2012
Fourteen settling parties filed a settlement agreeing to a significantly reformed
Rule 21, a new form interconnection request, and a new form interconnection
agreement for exporting generators.
September 13, 2012
In Decision 12-09-018, the Commission approved the entire package of reforms
proposed by the settling parties without modification.
September 20, 2012
PG&E, SCE, and SDG&E each posted the reformed Rule 21 and new features.
September 25, 2012
Assigned Commissioner Florio issued Phase II Scoping Memo for R.11-09-011.
The Rule 21 Reforms Respond to the Commission’s Goals
1. “Timely” - New timelines and accountability rules standardize the
interconnection process
2. “Non-discriminatory” - New clearly defined interconnection study
tracks serve all segments of the diverse distributed generation market
3. “Cost-effective” - Highest permitted generating capacity penetration
levels in the U.S. where safety and reliability tests are met
4. “Transparent” - New market-wide tools inform interconnection siting
For Industry: Anticipated Outcomes of the Rule 21 Reforms
Pre-Application Report,
integrated queue, and
interconnection capacity
maps
Inform siting decisions and
manage expectations
Specific standards permitting
higher penetration levels of
generating capacity
Permit more generation to be
sited in cost-effective locations
associated with load
Clear timelines and defined
eligibility for study tracks
Improve predictability and
transparency of
interconnection process
Financial security
requirements
Reduce stagnation of queuedahead requests
New dispute resolution tools
Permit more efficient resolution
of timeline-related disputes
For Utilities: Anticipated Outcomes of the Rule 21 Reforms
Defined study tracks based
on technical characteristics
Deploy engineers efficiently,
improve ability to manage
interconnection workload
Safety and reliability tests
tied to new thresholds of
generating capacity against
minimum load
Ensure safety and reliability as
distributed generation
penetration levels increase
Clear timelines and financial
security requirements
Ensure that viable projects
remain in the queue
Tests to identify
interdependency with
transmission system
Ensure that interconnection
studies conducted under state
and federal tariffs are based on
the electric grid’s engineering
realities
Phase II Issues Will Further Advance the Commission’s Goals
1. “Timely” - Distribution Group Study Process
2. “Non-discriminatory” – Compliance with timelines, completion rates
by study track, effectiveness of dispute resolution tools
3. “Cost-effective” – Interconnection cost responsibility
4. “Transparent” – Additional standardized interconnection agreements
Information and Resources
CPUC Decision 12-09-018 adopting the Rule 21 Settlement:
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M028/K168/28168335.PDF
Assigned Commissioner Michel P. Florio’s Phase II Scoping Memo:
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M028/K946/28946652.PDF
Proceeding Detail and Docket for R.11-09-011:
http://delaps1.cpuc.ca.gov/CPUCProceedingLookup/f?p=401:56:42780590447401::NO
SCE Interconnection Process
Michael Moore
Project Manager, Grid Interconnection
and Contract Development
15
State of the Queue
Active Interconnection Requests
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
3/1/09
6/1/09
9/1/09
12/1/09
3/1/10
TO
6/1/10
9/1/10
12/1/10
Rule 21
3/1/11
6/1/11
9/1/11
12/1/11
3/1/12
6/1/12
9/1/12
WDAT
16
State of the Queue
Active Interconnection Projects
Tariff
Count
MWs
347
447
474
525
WDAT
149
2,224
TOT
117
22,425
613
25,123
Rule 21
CREST
ALL
Total Likely Export
17
What Constitutes a Complete
Interconnection Request?
Application
Processing
•
Interconnection
Agreement
Project
Implementation
A completed interconnection request form, with all requested technical data
A site plan diagram
A single line electrical diagram
Site exclusivity documentation
An Interconnection Request Fee and, if detailed studies are required, a study deposit
•
•
•
–
•
Technical Studies
Complete Interconnection Requests include:
–
–
–
–
–
•
Technical
Scoping Meeting
The Interconnection Request Fee is $800
For Fast Track: there is no fee for the Initial Review, if a project requires Supplemental Review, the fee is $2,500
For Independent Study process: the deposit for projects 5 MWs and less is $10,000 for a System Impact Study and $15,000 for
a Facilities Study, for projects greater than 5 MW is $50,000 plus $1,000/MW up to $250,000 maximum.
Rule 21 Interconnection Requests are for energy only and full capacity deliverability is not available
Request for Distribution Service is a separate application that you may need
depending on your power procurement agreement (see Section 15.2 of WDAT).
Lack of site exclusivity documentation and lack of technical data are typical reasons for
triggering a deficiency notice.
18
Rule 21 Generator Interconnection Process
Study Tracks
Distribution Group Study Process
• Group study for interdependent projects
on the distribution system
•
•
•
•
•
Cluster Study Process
Not conducted under Rule 21, Applicants apply
under Wholesale Distribution Access Tariff
No size limit
Studies groups of electrically-related generation
Cost of upgrades allocated among group based
on contribution
Deliverability options
Features
Features
Features
•
•
•
•
Independent Study Process (ISP)
Detailed study of projects in serial fashion
No size limit
CAISO test for electrical independence
SCE test for electrical independence
•
Features
Fast Track Process
• Screening process to determine if project can be
interconnected without further study
• Limited to 3MW or less on distribution system
• Customer options meeting and Supplemental
Review Screens if fail Initial Review screens
•
If pass Initial Review screens, go directly
to cost estimate and interconnection
agreement. Otherwise, move to
Supplemental Review ($2,500 fee).
If fail screens, options meeting to evaluate
–
–
–
•
•
•
Changes to generation facility
Changes to distribution system
Or move into Detailed Study
•
Apply any time of year
System Impact Study and Facilities Study
Study deposit: <= 5 MW $10,000 for SIS,
$15,000 for FS, > 5 MW $50,000 plus
$1,000 per MW; Max $250,000
3-step security postings (see below)
•
Details to be worked out in Phase 2 of R.11-09-011
•
•
•
Open window each year 3/1-3/31
One study cycle per year – 2 Phases
Study deposit: $50,000 plus
$1,000 per MW; Max $250,000
3-step security postings
•
–
–
–
Between Phase I and II
After Phase II
At Start of Construction
19
Technical Scoping Meeting
Application
Processing
Technical
Scoping Meeting
Technical Studies
Interconnection
Agreement
Project
Implementation
• The purpose of the scoping meeting is to:
– Ensure a common understanding of interconnection customer’s project.
– Ensure understanding of generator interconnection procedures.
– Come to an agreement on point of Interconnection (POI) and generator size.
•
SCE will provide technical system details, limitations, and information regarding earlier queued projects.
– Outline general study process steps.
– Outline next steps.
– On the basis of the meeting, Applicant shall
confirm POI.
20
Scope of Interconnection
Technical Studies
Application
Processing
Technical
Scoping Meeting
Technical Studies
Interconnection
Agreement
Project
Implementation
• Technical studies are intended to provide:
– Impact of generation on SCE’s electric system and/or the CAISO grid.
– Scope of facilities required to ensure the safety, reliability, and integrity of
the grid:
• Interconnection facilities
– Generator-specific facilities required for interconnection.
• Distribution upgrades
– Upgrades to the distribution system required by the generator .
• Network upgrades
– Upgrades to the network (CAISO controlled grid) triggered by the generator .
– Cost estimate for required facilities and duration of expected construction.
21
Financial Security Postings
• Three financial security postings are due at
different times during the ISP.
– Initial posting due:
• 60 calendar days after SIS.
– Second posting due:
• 120 calendar days after Facilities Study (or SIS if Facilities Study waived).
– Third posting due:
• On or before start of construction.
• Failure to post within the specified time will result in the
Interconnection Request being deemed withdrawn.
22
Interconnection Agreement
Application
Processing
•
•
–
–
–
Interconnection
Agreement
Project
Implementation
Estimated cost and schedule
Defines the network upgrades, distribution upgrades, and
interconnection facilities to be constructed
Identifies major milestones
Defines the point of interconnection
Specifies the required financial obligations
Interconnection agreements do not contain:
–
–
–
•
Technical Studies
Interconnection agreement negotiations commence following completion of studies or successful eligibility for
Fast Track status.
An Interconnection agreement is a contract that sets forth the requirements for interconnection, including:
–
–
•
Technical
Scoping Meeting
Provisions for power procurement
Generation tie-lines
Access to SCE rights-of-way
Interconnection agreements are executed by the Applicant
and SCE.
23
Project Implementation
Application
Processing
Technical
Scoping Meeting
Technical Studies
Interconnection
Agreement
Project
Implementation
• After execution of interconnection agreement, SCE and interconnection
customer commence Engineering/design, Procurement, and Construction
(EPC) of the generating and interconnection facilities.
– SCE will be responsible for EPC of the agreed upon facilities listed in the interconnection
agreement.
– Customer will be responsible for EPC of the electrical system on the customer’s side of the
point of change of ownership (unless otherwise specified in the interconnection agreement).
– Any facilities that will be constructed by customer and deeded to SCE will have to be EPC’d to
appropriate specifications.
• After the completion of EPC, SCE and the customer will coordinate a preparallel inspection and commissioning prior to achieving synchronization.
24
Types of Interconnection Costs
• Interconnection Facilities
– Sole use facilities, specific to the project
• Distribution System Upgrades and Network upgrades
– Dependent on the location of the project, the size of the project and
the relative position in the queue
– Network Upgrades in transmission vague areas create added
complexity (see next slide)
• Those areas where the combination of existing grid characteristics and
projects in the queue before your project result in the need for upgrades
• Metering and Telemetry Costs
• Environmental Mitigation Costs
– May be reduced by including SCE’s facilities in Customers EIR
• Income Tax Component of Contribution (ITCC)
25
Transmission Area Report for a
Transmission Vague Area
• Transmission Interconnection
Planning’s “Area Study” reports
will be published as they are
revised in parallel with the
cluster process.
• Green Projects can proceed to
an Interconnection Agreement.
• Red Projects can proceed only
if they are willing to fund
needed upgrades
26
Projects in “Transmission Vague” Areas
• Customers will be provided the area report¹ so they can see where they
fall in relation to the red and green areas and the projects in the queue
before them
• Because of the complexities of the number and types of projects in the
queue ahead of your project and the levels of existing load, generation
and transmission infrastructure, SCE can only provide a range of cost
estimates based on the information available at the time
• Customers Need to Make a Decision
– Despite this uncertainty, active Rule 21 generators will be obligated by the tariff to move
forward or withdraw. To move forward, customers might need to commit to funding
such upgrades and post security.
• In the long term, the additional clarity regarding the queue achieved with
this approach will benefit all stakeholders.
¹ Distribution upgrades and interconnection facilities cost are not included in the area report and will be provided
separately.
27
Rule 21 Provides
New Tools for Developers
• Combined Rule 21 and WDAT interconnection queue was
posted on SCE’s open access website on October 1st and will
be updated monthly
• Pre-Application Report
• SCE Ombudsman will assist developers by addressing disputes
over missed timelines ([email protected])
• These tools and more are available at
http://www.sce.com/AboutSCE/Regulatory/openaccess/default.htm
28
Transition Plan
Cindy Jacobs
Project Manager, Regulatory Policy T&D
29
Transition Plan Overview
• The Transition Plan explains how the Revised tariff will
be applied to already queued generators
• Timelines:
– Clock starts ticking on the effective date of the tariff and
when notice is provided to Applicant
– Tariff allows extensions of timelines when needed
• Rule 21 now requires that projects that are in
transmission interdependent areas be studied in a
transmission cluster under the WDAT generation
interconnection procedures
– Under SCE’s Transition Plan, there is an exception for
projects with queue dates on or before March 16, 2012
30
Transition: Application Process
and Fast Track
Application
Processing
•
Technical Studies
Interconnection
Agreement
Project
Implementation
Interconnection Requests that were submitted prior to September 20, 2012, but have
not been given a queue date, will be processed according to the Revised Rule 21
–
–
•
Technical
Scoping Meeting
A new Interconnection Request does not need to be submitted
Interconnection Request will be deemed complete based on the requirements of the old Rule 21
Applicants in the Fast Track process (Initial or Supplemental Review) will be evaluated
under the new Fast Track screens
31
Transition: Projects that Require
Detailed Study
Application
Processing
•
•
•
•
Technical
Scoping Meeting
Technical Studies
Interconnection
Agreement
Project
Implementation
Applicants that require Detailed Study will be advised what study track they qualify for
Interconnection Requests that are not transmission interdependent will follow the Independent
Study Process in the Revised Rule 21
Interconnect Requests that are transmission interdependent will be studied in the cluster study
process
– Required to withdraw from Rule 21 and may apply under the WDAT Tariff
However, there is an exception for projects that have a queue
date of March 16, 2012 or earlier
– These projects will continue to be studied serially
– Special timelines will apply
32
Transition: Serial Study Group
Does Applicant have a queue date on
or before March 16, 2012?
No
Is Applicant
transmission
interdependent?
Yes
Is Applicant
transmission
interdependent?
No
No
ISP per Revised Rule
21 timelines.
ISP per Revised
Rule 21 timelines.
Yes
Yes
ISP per timelines
specified in Transition
Plan.
Cluster study process per
WDAT timelines.
33
Transition: Special Provisions for the
Serial Study Group
• The Transition Plan sets out timelines for the serial study group
– These timelines only apply to generators who have signed a study agreement
by July 31, 2012
• Generators who did not sign a study agreement by that date will be advised of the
completion dates by their project managers
– For projects with queue dates prior to 3/31/11, System Impact Studies are due
November 30, 2012
– For projects with queue dates after 3/31/11, SIS are due February 28, 2013
– For projects that proceed to a Facilities Study, the timelines are staggered
• The first 75 requests will be completed within 90 calendar days
• The second 75 requests will be completed within 180 calendar days
• The remaining requests will be completed within 270 calendar days
– For projects that proceed to an Interconnection Agreement, the same
staggered timelines apply (30 calendar days, 60 calendar days and 90 calendar
days)
34
Transition: Interconnection
Agreement
Application
Processing
Technical
Scoping Meeting
Technical Studies
Interconnection
Agreement
Project
Implementation
• Sign the IFFOA; or
• Request one of the new Generator
Applicants who have previously
received an Interconnection
Interconnection Agreements
Facilities Financing and Ownership • The IFFOA is not a stand alone
Agreement (IFFOA)
interconnection agreement and requires
a CREST PPA to permit interconnection
Applicants who have not received a
• Will be provided one of the new Generator
draft IFFOA as of
Interconnection Agreements
September 20, 2012
35
Questions?
For more information on interconnection see
http://www.sce.com/AboutSCE/Regulatory/openaccess/default.htm
Contact Us
[email protected]
(Put Rule 21 in the subject line)
(626) 302-3688
Scroll down
36
SCE Renewable Procurement Opportunities
for Rule 21 Generators
October 9, 2012
Gerry Torribio, Janice Wang
Renewable & Alternative Power Origination
SCE Delivers More Renewable Energy Than
Any Company In The U.S.
2011 Renewable Resources
15.5 Billion kWh
21.1% of SCE’s portfolio
Renewable Resources
Goals
(billion kWh)
15.5
Small Hydro 6%
28.3
83%
Increase
Solar 6%
Biomass 6%
Geothermal
47%
Wind 35%
2011
Actual
Procurement
2020
33% RPS
Goal
Preliminary EIA energy data (kWh) indicates that in 2010 SCE procured:
• 49% of the nation's and 59% of California's geothermal generation
• 55% of the nation's and 87% of California's solar generation
• 5% of the nation's and 64% of California's wind generation
Page: 38
Opportunities for Rule 21 Generators
Renewable Market Adjusting Tariff
(Re-MAT)
Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act
(PURPA)
AB 1613 Feed-in-Tariff
Page: 39
Re-MAT Overview
• Legislative/regulatory mandated FIT for renewable generators ≤ 3 MW
• SCE’s program cap is 226 MW (~68 MW remaining) split into three
buckets:
•
•
•
•
Peaking, as-available
Non-peaking, as-available
Baseload
All MWs executed under CREST count towards this goal.
• Price starts at $89.23/MWh and adjusts bimonthly according to
subscription for each resource type.
•
•
If capacity is undersubscribed, price increases
If capacity is oversubscribed, price decreases
• Standard contract
• Re-MAT replaces California Renewable Energy Small Tariff (CREST)
• Program not yet effective.
•
•
CPUC Decision 12-05-035 established eligibility and pricing, but is subject to
final CPUC decision on tariff and standard contract
Second CPUC Decision expected Q4, 2012.
Page: 40
Changes from CREST to Re-MAT
•
Pursuant to SB 32 and SBX 1 2, the CPUC is in the process of replacing CREST with Re-MAT
•
The transition to Re-MAT will occur through two CPUC decisions: (1) pricing and eligibility (D.12-05035), and (2) power purchase agreement and tariff language (decision expected in Q4 2012)
CREST
• Generator < 1.5 MW
• Program Cap of 247.7 MW
(158 MW executed to date; 64% cap met)
• Price is Market Price Referent
• CSI/SGIP/NEM participants ineligible
• Fully Deliverable TOD only
Re-MAT
• Renewable QF Generator < 3.0 MW
• Program Cap of 226 MW (CREST counts
towards Re-MAT)
(Assuming no more CREST PPAs are
executed, cap is 68 MW)
• Bimonthly price adjustment according to
market activity
• Capacity split into 3 resource buckets
• No network upgrades greater than $300,000
• CSI/SGIP generators must have operated for
10 years from first incentive payment; NEM
participants must terminate NEM
• Fully Deliverable vs. Energy Only TOD
• No daisy-chaining
• 10 MW supplier concentration cap
• Application Fee ($2/kW)
• Developer Experience
Until CPUC issues a final ruling on the Rule 21 Reform, WDAT generators are eligible for
Re-MAT. After CPUC’s final ruling, eligibility appear to be limited to Rule 21 generators.
Page: 41
Denial of Service
The generating facility does not meet the
requirements of CPUC Code Section
399.20, all applicable CPUC decisions,
laws, building standards, and utility
interconnection requirements.
The applicant will have an excess of
10 MW of executed and effective
Re-MAT PPAs with SCE.
NonCompliance
Supplier
Concentration
Grid Instability
The project appears to be part of a
larger overall installation by the
same company or consortium in the
same general location.
Unfulfilled
prior
obligations
Daisy-chaining
Otherwise not
eligible
The applicant does not otherwise meet
the requirements of Schedule Re-MAT.
The grid serving the point of interconnection
is inadequate or the aggregate of all electric
facilities on a distribution circuit would
adversely impact utility operation and load
restoration efforts of the distribution system.
There exist any outstanding
obligations owed to SCE under a
previously executed Re-MAT PPA
or other agreement related to the
sale of energy, capacity, green
attributes, or other related
products, in each case, that
relates to either any portion of the
site or the interconnection queue
position to be utilized by the
project seeking service.
Exact requirements are
pending final CPUC
approval.
Page: 42
Timeline of Transition
Today
8/15/2012
Opening Comments
on proposed tariffs
and PPA due
5/7/2012
2nd Joint IOU PPA Workshop
3/20/2012
CPUC issues PD
on pricing
2/15/2012
IOUs file Joint
IOU PPA
3/16/2012
Filed 2nd draft of
PPA
1/10/2012
CPUC Ruling Setting
Workshop on PPA
2012
2/22/2012
Joint IOU PPA
Workshop
Q1
•
•
4/9/2012
Filed Opening
Comments on PD
6/21/2012
SCE files motion
for clarification
regarding CREST
5/24/2012
CPUC issues
Final Decision
on pricing
7/18/2012
IOUs file
proposed tariff
and PPA
7/10/2012
CPUC issues
ruling on SCE’s
motion
11/30/2012
CPUC issues final
decision on tariff
and PPA
11/1/2012
Reply Comments
on PD due
9/10/2012
Reply Comments
on proposed
tariffs and PPA
due
10/18/2012
Opening Comments
on PD due
Q3
2/1/2013
IOUs hold first bimonthly auction
1/1/2013
IOUs launch
Re-MAT
12/7/2012
IOUs file
Advice Letter
Q4
2013
Q1
Stakeholders have dedicated many hours to crafting a program that balances the needs of
different stakeholders
CREST is active until Re-MAT becomes effective.
Ineligible CREST applicants must comply with Schedule Re-MAT to be considered for a Re-MAT
PPA.
WDAT projects are eligible to participate in Re-MAT until the CPUC makes a final determination
on the Rule 21 Reform.
–
•
4/16/2012
Filed Reply
Comments on PD
Q2
–
•
4/30/2012
Filed 3rd draft
of PPA
10/11/2012
CPUC issues PD
on tariff and PPA
After CPUC ruling, only Rule 21 projects appear to be eligible to participate in Re-MAT.
Details on the Re-MAT proceeding can be found at
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/Renewables/hot/feedintariffs.htm
Page: 43
General Process Flow
JANUARY 2013
Sunday
M onday
Tuesday
W ednesday
2
1
Thursday
3
Friday
4
Saturday
5
Re-MAT Participation
Request Checklist
Re-M AT launches;
applicants may begin
submitting Re-M AT
applications
6
13
7
14
8
9
15
16
10
11
12
17
18
19
25
26
SCE will confirm the completion of a Re-MAT
application within 20 business days
20
21
22
23
24
27
28
29
30
31
SCE confirms
completion of Re-M AT
application
•
•
•
Complete applications will be assigned a Re-MAT Number
Applicants will have 10 business days to cure any application
deficiencies.
The more complete the application is, the less time it will take
to be deemed complete.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Re-MAT Application
Interconnection Study
Project Description w/Single
Line Diagram
Executed NDA
Application Fee ($2/kW of
nameplate capacity)
Site Control Attestation
Daisy-Chaining Attestation
Supplier Concentration
Attestation
Exact requirements are pending
final CPUC approval.
Page: 44
General Process Flow (cont.)
Sunday
FEBRUARY 2013
Sunday
M onday
Tuesday
W ednesday
Thursday
Friday
1
MARCH 2013
M onday
Tuesday
W ednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
1
2
Saturday
2
Re-M AT Price is
3
posted on SCE
website: $89.23/M Wh
4
5
6
7
8
9
12
13
14
15
16
Price Acceptance
Deadline
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Interested participants must submit a complete and
executed PPA within 5 Business Days of the Price
Acceptance Deadline.
PPA Submittal
Deadline
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Price is available for 20 Business Days
17
18
19
20
21
President's Day
22
23
SCE will execute PPA before the next RE-MAT price is published.
24
25
26
27
28
31
• SCE will execute PPAs in order of the Re-MAT Number.
• Eligible participants without a Re-MAT PPA will be eligible to “strike” at the available price in subsequent periods.
• An eligible participant that loses its position in the program must submit a new Re-MAT application to participate in
Re-MAT.
• SCE may file a motion with the CPUC to suspend Re-MAT when evidence of market manipulation or malfunction
exists.
Page: 45
Re-MAT Pricing & Capacity Allocation
•
•
• Price will increase
by the sum of (1)
$4/MWh plus (2) the
price increase for
the most recent prior
period (i.e. +$4,
+$8, +$12, etc.)
• The capacity of
eligible generating
facilities seeking a
PPA is 100% of
Period 1’s capacity
• Price will decrease
by the sum of (1)
$4/MWh plus (2)
the price decrease
for the most recent
prior period (i.e.
+$4, +$8, +$12,
etc.)
No Price Change
$89.23/MWh
• The capacity of
eligible generating
facilities seeking a
PPA is < 50% of
Period 1’s capacity
Price Decrease
•
Program capacity is allocated over 12 bi-monthly periods
– Period 1 capacity < 3 MW.
Minimum Participation Threshold: At least 5 eligible projects from different sponsors before a price
change
Price Increase
•
• The capacity of
eligible generating
facilities seeking a
PPA at the
available price is
50% - 99% of
Period 1’s capacity
• Minimum
Participation
Threshold is unmet
Uncontracted capacity will be reallocated to the same product type following Period 12 and will be equal
to the lesser of the capacity allocated to Period 1 and the total amount of uncontracted capacity.
SCE will not execute the last marginal PPA that causes SCE to exceed the capacity allocated for that
bimonthly period.
Page: 46
Example of Price Change
Capacity allocation assumes
no more than 158 MW of
CREST PPAs are executed.
Period 1
No price change because
subscription was 50% 99% of Period 1’s capacity.
Period 2
Price increased because
subscription was < 50% of
Period 1’s capacity.
Period 3
Period 4
Peaking Non-Peaking
Peaking Non-Peaking
Peaking Non-Peaking
Peaking Non-Peaking
Baseload
Baseload
Baseload
Baseload
As-Available As-Available
As-Available As-Available
As-Available As-Available
As-Available As-Available
Price
$89.23
$89.23
$89.23
$85.23
$89.23
$93.23
$77.23
$89.23
$101.23
$65.23
$93.23
$97.23
Capacity (MW)
3
3
3
1.64
1.64
1.64
1.64
1.64
1.64
1.64
1.64
1.64
Offers (MW)
6
2
0
3
1.86
1
3
1
3
---MW Executed
3
2
0
1.86
1.86
1
1.86
1
1.86
---Price Change
---($4)
$0.00
$4.00
($8)
$0.00
$8.00
($12)
$4.00
($4)
Price decreased because
Period 1’s capacity was
oversubscribed.
Price change accelerates
with every consecutive
oversubscription or
undersubscription
The initial price
change increment
is $4/MWh.
Page: 47
Re-MAT PPA
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standard Contract across IOUs
Term: 10, 15, 20 years
Price: Fixed
Commercial Operation Date:
– 24 months + 6 month extension for delay
Transactions: Full Buy/Sell or Excess
Deliverability: 2 sets of Time of Delivery Factors
Compliance Expenditure Cap: $25,000/year
Economic Curtailment: Take or pay
WMDVBE Reporting
Performance Requirement: % of Contract Quantity measured over two consecutive years
– Wind: 140%
− Other intermittent technologies: 170%
– Baseload: 180%
− Hydro: Seller to propose a reasonable threshold
Credit & Collateral:
– Generators < 1 MW: $20/kW
− Generators > 1 MW: $50/kW
Buyer Right of First Refusal: 2 years
Seller Transmission Buy-Down Right
Telemetry:
– Generators < 500 kW may participate in an aggregated telemetering solution with a $20,000
cost cap.
Final PPA pending CPUC approval; PD expected in Q4, 2012
Page: 48
QF Contract Overview
•
QFs are defined in the Public Utilities Regulatory Policy Act of 1978 (as
amended and codified in 18 C.F.R. §§ 292.203 and following), and
include two types of facility.
– Cogeneration facility (a.k.a. Combined Heat & Power or “CHP”): generating
facility that sequentially produces electricity and another form of useful thermal
energy (such as heat or steam) in a way that is more efficient than the
separate production of both forms of energy.
– Small power production facility: generating facility of 80 MW or less whose
primary energy source is renewable (hydro, wind or solar), biomass, waste, or
geothermal resources. There are some limited exceptions to the 80 MW size
limit that apply to certain facilities certified prior to 1995.
•
“QFs” (or Qualifying Facilities) can elect to interconnect under “state
jurisdictional” tariffs if they:
• Sell power only to an electric utility at the utility’s avoided cost, pursuant to its
must-take obligation under PURPA.
• Have a net capacity (generator rating less auxiliary loads) does not exceed 20
MW.
Page: 49
SCE’s PURPA Program
•
•
•
•
Interconnection: Seller elects which path to follow (WDAT or Rule 21).
Term: Up to 7 years for existing capacity, Up to 12 years for new capacity.
Eligibility: QFs of any technology up to 20 MW net output.
Pricing:
–
–
–
–
•
•
SRAC energy pricing as determined by CPUC
Capacity pricing pursuant to D. 07-09-040
Firm Capacity at $91.97 / kW-yr
As-Available Capacity of $41.22 / kW-yr escalating each year
Project Development Security, Performance Assurance for new facilities.
Contract: “The Standard Contract for Qualifying Facilities with a Power Rating
that is Less than or Equal to 20 MW,” and an application form to request such
a contract, are available at
http://www.sce.com/EnergyProcurement/renewables/chp/chp-settlement.htm
Generators able to provide Resource Adequacy benefits to the utility are eligible to select
the Firm Capacity option of the Standard Contract.
Page: 50
SCE’s AB1613 Program
•
•
•
Interconnection: Seller elects which path to follow (WDAT or Rule 21).
Term: Up to 10 years for existing capacity, Up to 12 years for new capacity.
Eligibility: New, efficient CHP up to 20 MW net output:
–
–
•
Pricing:
–
–
–
•
•
Meet efficiency and energy use requirements of Section 2843 of Public Utilities Code and CEC
regulations (60% minimum efficiency), also PURPA requirements for cogeneration facility.
Commence operation on or after January 1, 2008.
Variable price component (based on gas price and 6,924 Btu/kWh heat rate)
Fixed price component (based on MPR fixed component)
Projects located in Local RA area get 10% bonus
Project Development Security, Performance Assurance for new facilities.
Contracts: This program has three types of power purchase contracts for
various sizes of project up to 20 MW. Contracts and application form
available at http://www.sce.com/EnergyProcurement/renewables/chp/chpab1613.htm
Generators able to provide Resource Adequacy benefits to the utility are eligible for
payments at AB1613 pricing; otherwise paid per PURPA As-Available pricing.
Page: 51
Questions
•
PURPA/CHP
Gerry Torribio
[email protected]
(626) 302-9669
•
Re-MAT
Janice Wang
[email protected]
(626) 302-3515
Page: 52
QUESTIONS?
53

similar documents