NOTICE OF EX PARTE MEETING WITH THE …

1 1 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF california Order Instituting Rulemaking to Develop a Successor to Existing Net energy Metering Tariffs Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section , and to Address Other Issues Related to Net energy Metering. Rulemaking 14-07-002 (Filed July 10, 2014) NOTICE OF EX PARTE MEETING WITH THE NONPROFIT SOLAR STAKEHOLDERS COALITION APRIL 24, 2017 Stephanie Wang James Grow Policy Director Senior Attorney california Housing Partnership Corp. National Housing Law Project 369 Pine Street, Suite 300 703 Market Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 San Francisco, CA 94103 415- 433- 6804 x323 415- 546- 7000 x3104 Maria Stamas Attorney Natural Resources Defense Council 111 Sutter Street, 21st Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 415- 875- 8240 Shana Lazerow Attorney, on behalf of california Environmental Justice Alliance 120 Broadway, Suite 2 Richmond, CA 94804 510-302-0430 x18 FILED4-24-1704:59 PM2 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF california Order Instituting Rulemaking to Develop a Successor to Existing Net energy Metering Tariffs Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section , and to Address Other Issues Related to Net energy Metering.

2 Rulemaking 14-07-002 (Filed July 10, 2014) NOTICE OF EX PARTE MEETING WITH THE NONPROFIT SOLAR STAKEHOLDERS COALITION Pursuant to Rule of Practice and Procedure , the california Housing Partnership Corporation, National Housing Law Project, california Environmental Justice Alliance and Natural Resources Defense Council hereby give NOTICE of the following ex PARTE MEETING . On Wednesday, April 19, 2017, from approximately 9:35am to 10:25am, Joanna Gubman, Commissioner Martha Guzman Aceves s energy Advisor, met with the following representatives of the Nonprofit Solar Stakeholders Coalition: Stephanie Wang ( california Housing Partnership Corporation), James Grow (National Housing Law Project), Shana Lazerow and Amee Raval ( california Environmental Justice Alliance), Maria Stamas (Natural Resources Defense Council) and Wayne Waite (Consultant to the Nonprofit Solar Stakeholders Coalition).

3 The purpose of the MEETING was to share the Nonprofit Solar Stakeholders Coalition s updated positions and analyses of priority issues that were more complex or where there was less stakeholder consensus. The Nonprofit Solar Stakeholders Coalition requested an All-Party MEETING to discuss these issues openly with the 3 Commission and stakeholders, and an opportunity to respond in writing to specific questions from the Commission ahead of the All-Party MEETING to ensure that parties updated positions are captured on the record. We recommended this approach to balance the need to provide more opportunities for parties to inform the record, beyond the initial request for proposals and replies last August, with the need for the Commission to issue a proposed decision soon per the statutory deadline. The Nonprofit Solar Stakeholders Coalition presented a refined proposal on integration of energy efficiency into the 693 program.

4 Rather than establishing property-level goals for energy efficiency, the Coalition now proposes a program-level goal. The program administrator would be responsible for MEETING a program-wide energy efficiency savings goal by making it easier for program participants to access energy efficiency technical assistance as well as incentives authorized by the Commission and provided through the california Department of Community Services and Development. The Coalition noted that the Commission s energy Savings Assistance Program refers to utility obligations to provide a Single Point of Contact, but did not create new obligations for utilities to help eligible multifamily property owners compare and apply for energy efficiency programs. Further, the Coalition noted that not all 693-eligible properties are eligible for the energy Savings Assistance Program. The Nonprofit Solar Stakeholders Coalition raised the need for the Commission to protect Tenant Net Financial Benefits, meaning how much solar value ends up in a tenant s pocket, after accounting for all related energy costs and affordable housing policies.

5 AB 693 s express purpose is to deliver clean energy and cost savings to low-income tenants. These required financial benefits for tenants can be diluted or devoured by unintended consequences. 4 Two other parties have proposed using a portion of the tenant s solar credit value to pay for a portion of the system costs through utility allowance adjustments. The Coalition emphasized that it is essential to separate the questions of (1) whether contribute a portion of tenant solar credit value to solar system costs, and (2) the mechanism for contributing a portion of the tenant solar credit value. The Coalition s analysis (attached) illustrates how using the utility allowance adjustment mechanism for this purpose could significantly reduce and negatively impact tenant net financial benefits. When asked about whether US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) projects should be eligible for 693 incentives, the Coalition responded that HUD projects should only be eligible if HUD sets a policy to treat 693 solar benefits as income for tenants rather than as utility bill savings that would trigger utility allowance adjustments that would result in federal recapture of 100% of the tenant solar benefits.

6 The Nonprofit Solar Stakeholders Coalition also responded to concerns that in a constrained funding scenario, providing 693 incentives for the energy storage components of solar projects would reduce the program s overall megawatts of solar installations. The Coalition pointed out that inclusion of energy storage would increase the solar value for participating owners and tenants at some locations, and accordingly including energy storage would strongly support program objectives at some locations. Since the Coalition anticipates that energy storage will likely become an essential component for ensuring project financial feasibility and stability, and thereby continued participation in the 693 program over the course of the 10-year program as rates and peak periods continue to shift, we recommended that the 693 program proactively support the multifamily affordable housing sector s transition to integrated solar 5 systems.

7 This action is also needed to ensure access, which is not possible by relying upon other Commission efforts to generally enable all properties in disadvantaged communities to access storage incentives since an estimated 70 percent of the properties eligible for AB 693 are not located in disadvantaged communities. Balancing both sets of concerns, the Coalition recommended that the Commission authorize a pilot program for integrated solar systems that include storage for the initial years of the program and plan to review the pilot as part of the Commission s triennial review of the 693 program required by statute. Finally, the Coalition emphasized the importance of an independent administrator to guarantee the program s long-term success, and noted that it is worth a 3 to 6 month delay for the Commission to competitively select an independent administrator. Respectfully submitted, Dated April 24, 2017 /s/_James Grow Stephanie Wang James Grow Policy Director Senior Attorney california Housing Partnership Corp.

8 National Housing Law Project 369 Pine Street, Suite 300 703 Market Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 San Francisco, CA 94103 415- 433- 6804 x323 415- 546- 7000 x3104 /s/_Maria Stamas Maria Stamas Attorney Natural Resources Defense Council 111 Sutter Street, 21st Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 415- 875- 8240 /s/_Shana Lazerow Shana Lazerow Attorney, on behalf of california Environmental Justice Alliance 120 Broadway, Suite 2 Richmond, CA 94804 510-302-0430 x18