california public power sb1 solar program calendar year ... · the california municipal utilities...

California Public Power

SB1 Solar Program

Calendar Year 2013

Status Report

July 1, 2014

California Public Power SB1 Solar Program Status ReportJanuary through December 2013 Reporting Period

July 1, 2014

INTRODUCTION

The California Municipal Utilities Association, the Northern California Power Agency, and the SouthernCalifornia Public Power Authority are pleased to present this annual report on the progress local publiclyowned utilities (POU) have made in implementing the California Solar Initiative. With programimplementation more than halfway complete, the State’s POUs offer this comprehensive report to helpcontextualize significant progress that has been made since 2008 that may not otherwise be evident by a“single year snapshot.” The report highlights the following:

POUs continue to offer attractive customer incentives to further SB1 goals, while maintaininglow electricity rates.

POUs are on track to fully expend the funds made available before the program sunsets and, ifinstallations continue at their current rate, public power will exceed the Energy Commission’santicipated installed capacity.

POU programs are designed to meet a statutory expenditure requirement; this design featureis extremely important as it allowed numerous POUs to offer higher rebate levels in early yearsto best encourage voluntary customer participation in more expensive solar systems, during aneconomic downturn and absent significantly higher “top tier” rates that principally drivecustomer investments in other service territories.

Each POU is different and each has tailored its solar program for its customers accordingly;POUs have been and continue to be successful in providing attractive incentives to customersto further SB1 goals.

The amount of installed kilowatts (kW) has increased an average of 8,000 to 9,000 kWannually.

The cost per installed kW has declined, and a self-sufficient solar industry has emerged.

We appreciate this opportunity to provide a comprehensive review of SB1 program results to date withinthe context of a full understanding of the variety and number of publicly-owned utility programs.

STATE SENATE BILL 1 (SB1) BACKGROUND

SB1 was signed into law on August 21, 2006. The legislation requires each POU governing body to adopt,implement, and finance a solar initiative program to incentivize investments in and encourage the increasedinstallation of both residential and commercial solar energy systems beginning on January 1, 2008.California’s Public Resources Code §25780 define three legislative goals for the California Solar Initiative:

1. To install solar energy systems with a generation capacity equivalent of 3,000 megawatts;2. To establish a self-sufficient solar industry in which solar energy systems are a viable

mainstream option for both homes and businesses in 10 years; and3. To place solar energy systems on 50% of new homes in 13 years.

POUs play an important role in supporting the 3,000 megawatt (MW) goal established by SB1. It must alsobe noted that while these three legislative goals provide general direction to State agencies and utilities


July 1, 2014

about the initiative’s objectives, mandatory requirements and actions are defined in different statutorysections. For POUs, these primary statutory requirements can be found in Public Utilities Code §2854:1

Subdivision (a) states that POUs shall adopt, implement, and finance a solar initiative program. Subdivision (b) requires that POUs provide a minimum incentive of $2.80 per watt for the

installation of solar energy systems, and that the incentive declines at a rate of no less than anaverage of 7% per year.

Subdivision (c) directs that POUs initiate a proceeding to fund a solar energy program toadequately support the goal of installing 3,000 MWs of photovoltaic solar energy.

Subdivision (f) defines “adequately support the goal of installing 3,000 MWs” by requiringstatewide expenditures for POU solar programs must be $784 million, and also establishes thebaseline expenditure level for each POU based on that utility’s percentage of the totalstatewide load served by all POUs.

As required by statute, POUs adhere to overall expenditure goals for the California Solar Initiative program.(Some POUs have voluntarily adopted MW goals as well). Annual expenditure levels for each POU varyconsiderably based primarily on the size of the utility and local governing body decision-making; somePOUs have also undertaken additional steps to finance other related expenses to further incentivize solarenergy system installations in their service territories. For example, where some POUs offered theminimum incentive of $2.80/watt at the start of the program in 2008, others offered higher rebate levels tobegin with – some in combination with rebate caps – in order to incentivize higher customer participationlevels during an extended period of nationwide economic hardship. Even in recent years, with theeconomy slowly improving, the average POU residential utility rates have ranged from approximately 8-17cents per kWh. These low rates remain a significant factor in customers’ determinations to invest in solar.Customers in other service territories with much higher “top tier” rates have a much greater incentive toinvest in solar to avoid paying dramatically higher rates overall.

Beginning June 2008, POUs have been required to report annually information relating to the utility’s solarinitiative program(s), including the number of photovoltaic solar watts installed, the total number ofphotovoltaic systems installed, the total number of applicants, the amount of incentives awarded, and thecontribution towards program goals. Beginning in 2013, annual progress reports are due July 1st.

PUBLICLY-OWNED UTILITY SB1 PROGRAM PROGRESS THROUGH 2013

POUs are actively promoting the State’s objectives under SB1 via marketing, community outreach, andworking with solar installers, as well as research and development programs focusing on distributed solarresources. While incentive program expenditures increased in 2013 for almost half of the POUs, theremaining half of the POUs spent less compared to the prior year. This increase can be attributed toseveral factors such as: strong interest in a rebate program for some communities; overall economicimprovement in some areas; additional incentives offered by some installers; and prior year installationcompleted in 2013 or incentives that were on hold due to budget constraints until 2013. The decrease inexpenditures can be attributed to several factors, including: that some communities are still significantlyaffected by the economic downturn; installation costs continue to decrease; funds for the program have

1 SB 1 added §387.5 to the Public Utilities Code regarding POU requirements. This section was renumbered to §2854 byAssembly Bill 2227 (Bradford, 2012).


July 1, 2014

been exhausted or the program is temporarily suspended resulting in a queue; or that no applications werereceived while prior applications from previous years were fulfilled.

Some utilities have already exhausted their SB1 funding but continue to receive applications. Theseutilities still accept applications and assist customers to the greatest extent possible. Customers are madeaware when program funds are exhausted or if there are no rebates available, yet for most, due to thedecreasing installation costs, some still proceed with having the installation work performed. This indicatesthat even with no incentives available, customers are still interested in having PV systems installed and thata self-sufficient solar industry has emerged.

Many utilities maintain a “funds reserved” amount, which can represent applications received yetinstallations have not been completed, or in some cases installations are completed and incentive fundsare to be paid over time in future years. In both cases, the utilities reserve these funds from the incentivesavailable under the life of the program to enable payments. These numbers are significant as they illustratea future commitment. It should be noted that there are a few utilities that have no reserves allocatedprimarily because they have reached their SB1 funding or budget limitations.

A growing number of utilities are approaching or have already exhausted their program fund commitment.In a few cases, programs were shut down temporarily. A few utilities were able to reopen the program mid-year, but had to quickly close it again due to the amount of applications and funds available. Depending onthe robustness of the program response, some utilities capped the rebate amount by sector and/orallocated a limited time period for applications to help control the influx of applications. The experience ofeach POU is unique, reflecting the localized nature of development and saturation of solar programs acrossthe diverse service territories.

Some installers are offering leasing or power purchase agreement options to help offset some of the costs,which has helped in some areas, but not in all. While in other communities, some customers chose toinstall PV systems even without a rebate because they want to take advantage of long-term energysavings. In the past few years, a number of communities have authorized Property Assessed CleanEnergy (PACE) financing which allows property owners to finance solar energy systems with no moneydown and payment through their property tax bills.

Some POUs that previously had few applications are experiencing increased participation, driven bydevelopers or contractors who approach owners of buildings with large open space roofs, such as industrialand commercial buildings. The contractors and developers offer a combination of services includingfinancing, lease-back, and other unique structures to incent participation. In most areas, developers,contractors and PV installers have become very effective trade allies in marketing POU rebate programs.In addition, developers and contractors are aware of other tax incentives that they bring forth whenapproaching the customer.

In sum, local electric utilities are making a good faith effort and are successfully progressing to meet SB1goals. Utilities that have already met or exceeded their goals continue to assist customers with theirinstallation needs even without a rebate incentive. The POUs have also played an important role towardsestablishing a self-sufficient solar industry in which solar energy systems are a viable mainstream option forcustomers.


July 1, 2014

PUBLICLY-OWNED UTILITY SB1 PROGRAM CHALLENGES

Multiple factors influence a customer’s decision to invest in solar. Some factors are related to the utility,such as the rate structure and level of incentives as described above. POU rates are, on average,approximately 25% lower than IOU rates that typically include highly tiered rate structures, meaning it iseasier to incentivize solar installations in an IOU service area instead of a POU service area. POUs canalso have a mix of customers that is sharply different and far more concentrated than in the broad serviceareas covered by the IOUs, and this can affect how a SB1 program is designed and the ultimate success ofthat program.

Many other factors, though, are customer-motivated – and are beyond the scope of POUs to influence. Forexample, some POUs serve very poor communities that are still suffering from exceptionally highunemployment rates. Access to competitive solar companies also plays a key role in whether or not autility customer decides to invest in solar for their home or business. Customers in remote POU serviceterritories are impacted by less availability of solar providers. Large urban centers, such as the Bay Area,Los Angeles, and San Diego, naturally attract solar companies given that greater market opportunities areavailable. More rural communities, in which the populations are not as great or not as concentrated, aremore difficult and less profitable for some solar companies to serve.

Solar installations – even with an incentive contribution by the local utility or other tax incentives, andreduced cost of panels – are still expensive, especially for the areas deeply affected by the recession andstruggling with exceptionally high unemployment rates. Even then, customers would still need to pay aportion of the installation costs.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Due to a number of factors (but largely due to lower electricity rates and the economic recession)participation rates in POU programs were generally low in the early years of SB1. In more recent years,customers are increasingly taking advantage of POU solar incentives, even as those incentives decline –as required by statute. One reason for increased participation rates is that overall system costs havedecreased significantly in recent years, such that declining incentives were largely offset by less expensivesystems. In addition, leasing solar PV systems has proven to be a popular financing mechanism andallows customers to install solar at a lower cost than owning the system outright. The recent availability ofPACE financing is expected to make solar available to even more customers who otherwise cannot affordthe initial installation costs.

To support continued progress towards reaching the State’s solar goals, we would recommend that theEnergy Commission work with POUs to clarify evolving reporting requirements and to formalize a processprospectively to ensure that POUs’ issues and challenges are understood and addressed when providingannual progress reports. For example, discrepancies can arise when POUs are asked to only reportpayments made for current-year installations and not to include other public benefits payments that weremade in the current year for systems installed in prior years. Some POUs require participants to own theirsolar systems, which leads to under-reporting for the purposes of the SB1 solar report. A lack ofcollaboration on data reporting can lead to incomplete and/or erroneous understanding of the informationbeing requested. We look forward to working closer with the CEC on reporting SB1 programs annually.


July 1, 2014

In response to the required annual reporting, the following table provides summary information based onthe individual SB1 Solar Program Status Reports for 2013, which are contained herein.

Number ofApplicants

SystemsInstalled

Installed Capacity(kW)

Total 2013Expenditures

Incentives Reserved forFuture Year Payments

Alameda 14 24 163 $ 206,814 $ 3,813,100Anaheim 189 159 1,622 $ 3,371,178 $ 866,768Azusa 7 55 244 $ 402,563 $ 36,294Banning 18 18 76 $ 34,710 $ -Biggs 1 1 7 $ 5,770 $ -Burbank 8 8 43 $ 748,630 $ 642,103Cerritos - 2 222 $ - $ -Colton 17 16 56 $ 94,877 $ 5,123Corona 1 1 3 $ 3,406 $ -Glendale 93 78 846 $ 1,424,800 $ 617,071Gridley - - - $ - $ -Healdsburg 10 10 144 $ 66,677 $ 42,408IID 160 96 2,194 $ 3,298,210 $ 4,477,429Industry - - - $ - -Lassen - - - $ 10,759 $ -Lodi 25 27 158 $ 416,231 $ 3,263,998Lompoc 26 21 143 $ 99,264 $ 22,000Los Angeles (LADWP) 4,542 4,191 34,538 $ 202,911,278 $ 58,641,722Merced 35 31 267 N/A $ -Modesto 261 261 1,777 $ 4,588,001 $ 5,897,329Moreno Valley 42 42 211 $ 503,104 $ -Needles 8 5 43 $ 50,000 $ -Palo Alto 103 75 408 $ 1,103,216 $ 4,386,536Pasadena 162 93 462 $ 2,705,095 $ 5,449,710Pittsburg Power 6 6 17 $ 28,587 $ -Plumas Sierra (COOP) 13 13 64 $ 225,641 $ -Port of Oakland - 1 211 N/A $ -Rancho Cucamonga 2 2 24 $ 97,238 $ 59,186Redding - 12 93 $ 1,135,364 $ 2,663,453Riverside 193 292 1,793 $ 2,199,825 $ 1,983,398Roseville 142 138 713 $ 425,353 $ 660,000Sacramento (SMUD) 1,498 1,912 12,701 $ 9,081,825 $ 46,576,943San Francisco 194 195 944 $ 1,727,647 $ -Shasta Lake 9 10 43 $ 92,005 $ 9,750Silicon Valley Power 53 48 315 $ 3,843,485 $ 21,450,175Trinity N/A 1 5 $ 6,012 $ -Truckee Donner 22 14 61 $ 168,889 $ 211,479Turlock (TID) 221 221 6,206 $ 2,661,275 $ 19,406,549Ukiah 2 1 3 $ 4,835 $ 5,748Vernon 2 2 56 $ 109,395 $ 250,000Victorville - - - $ - $ -

Totals: 8,079 8,082 66,875 $ 243,851,959 $ 181,438,273

N/A denotes information not available at the time of publication.

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of

Apps Rcvd Apps Approved

Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 14 8 6

PBI

Total 14 8 6

Number of Installations per Building Type

Existing Buildings 8

New Construction Tier I

New Construction Tier II

Total (of all sectors) 8

Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 113.571 130,142 71,656$

48.970 75,843 135,158$

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 162.541 205,985

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

398,315$ $4,200,000 $386,900 2,127 kW

206,814$

Solar program information on website at:

None

None

Verified that installation is correct and operating properly when the solar meter is set.

AMP requires two meters.

www.alamedamp.com/solar-rebates-residential;

www.alamedamp.com/business/solar-rebates-business

1

Additional Information (as available)

Category Type

Senate Bill 1 Solar Program Status Report

Program Activities

Program Performance

Susan Kelly

[email protected]

Future Opportunities and Challenges: Due to project cancellations, limited residential and commercial rebates are available

through 2017.

206,814$

23

24

Total Systems

Installed

Residential - Affordable/ Low Income

Commercial

Non PV solar systems installed:

Known customer application issues/applications not approved: 6 EPBI rebate residential applications

withdrawn.

$3,813,100

Any training or builder/installer assistance:

Total Expenditures Incentives

Reserved

Industrial

Mixed-Use

Any auditing of installed systems:

Utility Name: Alameda Municipal Power

Program Reporting Period: January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013

Summary of Program Activities:

Systems Installed and Installed Capacity per Sector

Agricultural

In CY2013, 14 EPBI rebate applications were received; 8 were approved for installation

on existing buildings. A total of 24 installations were completed.

Utility Name: Anaheim Public Utilities Contact Person: Mark Brownrigg

Email Address: [email protected]

Program Reporting Period: Calendar Year 2013

Summary of Program Activities: Solar rebate program for residential and commercial properties.

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 178 174 6

PBI 11 9 8

Total 189 183 14






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 825.79 1,368,779 $1,902,451

13.38 21,067 $61,968

783.19 1,328,917 $468,813

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 1622.36 2,718,763 $2,433,232

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$3,198,915 $35,055,800 $17,761,876 26


13


Category Type

$866,768


Program Activities

Program Performance

$3,371,178

143

3

159

Future Opportunities and Challenges:




Agricultural

Total Systems

Installed



Known customer application issues/applications not approved:


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 7 7

PBI

Total 7 7






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations


Non-Profit

Government

31.68 80,942 67,128$

Total (of all sectors) 244.3 624,187 402,563$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

402,563$ 3,271,000$ 2,036,287$ 3,000 kW/3 MW

55 new systesm were installed during CY 2013, as compared to 44

during CY 2012 and only 7 during CY 2011.Future Opportunities and Challenges:

There is currently a waiting list for all new systems.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

1



Utility Name: Azusa Light & Water

Program Reporting Period: 1-1-13 to 12-31-13



Agricultural

Total Systems

Installed



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: None

36,294$


Program Activities

Program Performance

Paul Reid

[email protected]

402,563$

54

55


None

None

All systems internally pre and post inspected.

http://www.ci.azusa.ca.us/index.aspx?nid=565


Category Type

Contact Person:Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI

PBI 18 18

Total 18 18


Existing Buildings



Total (of all sectors)

Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 76 119,737 0

Non-ProfitGovernment

Total (of all sectors) 76 119,737 0

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

None 1,965,123 None n/a



Utility Name: City of Banning



Agricultural


Reserved

CommercialResidential - Affordable/ Low Income



None

Industrial

Mixed-Use


Program Activities

Program Performance

Veronica [email protected]

Summary of Program Activities: Due to Banning's aggressive marketing of its Solar PV Rebate Program, it met

and exceeded its SB1 rebate requirements in 2010. As a result Solar PV rebate funds are exhausted and the

program has been temporarily suspended pending allocation of additional funding.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: As PV installation costs continue to decrease, Banning continues to

receive Interconnection Agreements from customers wishing to install PV systems, although there are no

rebates available.


None

None

Nonehttp://ca-banning.civicplus.com/index.aspx?NID=300


Category Type

34,710

18

18

Total Systems

Installed

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 1 1 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 1 1 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 6.751 11955 $5,520.00

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 6.751 11955 $5,520.00

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$5,520.00 $181,153.00 $129,021.62 161



Utility Name: Biggs Municipal Utilities

Program Reporting Period: 1/01/13 to 12/31/13


Agricultural


Reserved

Commercial



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: NONE

$0.00

Industrial

Mixed-Use


Program Activities

Program Performance

Marlee Mattos

[email protected]

Summary of Program Activities: Continued to promote solar PV through customer education and the

dissemination of program information to contractors. Advised customers of program incentives through

billing fliers and city newsletter.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: We are a poor community with few customers able or willing to make

the investment in a solar PV system. Our housing stock is old, so available dollars are spent on modest

efficiency projects, rather than solar PV.


NONE

NONE

NONE

www.biggs-ca.gov


Category Type

$5,770.00

1

1

Total Systems

Installed

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 8 8

PBI

Total 8 8






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 42.7 66,127 $49,380

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 42.7 66,127 $49,380

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$731,425 up to $15 million $5,444,706 *N/A$642,103

Utility Name: Burbank Water and Power

Program Reporting Period: CY 2013


8

Total Systems

Installed


Mixed-Use

Non PV solar systems installed: None


Incentives

Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Agricultural

Total Expenditures


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Alfred Antoun

[email protected]

Summary of Program Activities: Eight EPBI residential applications were received and approved during CY 2013.

All eight installations which received incentives are on existing residential sites. Total PBI incentives paid for six

solar systems installed in previous years amount to $682,045 and are included in the Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting Year field. The Incentives Reserved field includes those PBI incentives projected to be paid for

those six installations.

* Note: BWP adopted a budgetary goal, not a kW goal.

Any training or builder/installer assistance: Phone and email assistance available from Solar Support Program

managers.Any auditing of installed systems: All systems given incentives were audited by a third party consultant.

Solar program information on website at: http://burbankwaterandpower.com/incentives-for-all-

customers/solar-photovoltaic-power

Future Opportunities and Challenges: Due to decreasing solar costs, 20 of the 28 systems installed in CY 2013

were without an incentive.

$748,630

8

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 0

PBI 0

Total 0


Existing Buildings



Total (of all sectors)

Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate

Non-Profit

Government 221.672 328,544 0

Total (of all sectors) 221.672 328544 0

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$0 $0 $0



Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Fredy Bonilla

[email protected]

$0

2

Total Systems

Installed



2


$0



Utility Name: Cerritos Electric Utility




Agricultural

City received total incentives of $286,156 from CSI via SCE for both PV

System Phases I and II.Future Opportunities and Challenges:


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 17 16 1

PBI 0 0 0

Total 17 16 1



New Construction Tier I 0

New Construction Tier II 0


Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 56.471 141,178 94,876.51

Non-Profit

Government

0

Total (of all sectors) 56.471 141,178 94,876.51

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

344,463.06$ $4,276,125.00 $1,124,015.49 4 MW

The City of Colton Electric Department (CED) offered residential

rebates for qualifying photovoltaic generation systems up to 3 kW for

the reporting year of 2013. During this reporting period CED paid 4

customer applicants under the program guidelines at $2.26/kW. One

applicant was partially paid for 1.59 kW at $2.26/kW and 1.41 kW paid

at $2.01/kW. The remaining 11 customer applicants were paid at

$2.01/kW. CED promotes the solar rebate program through a

community public access channel, press releases, social media, and

City website.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: Opportunities: CED continues to make changes to ensure program

success. These changes include modification to program

requirements, a 3 kW rebate cap and verification of installed

equipment.

Challenges: There was a high demand for the solar rebate program

resulting in full subscription early in the program year. CED will

maintain the allocation of funding for the 2014 reporting year with a

small sum of roll over from one cancelled project.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: City of Colton Public Utilities

Program Reporting Period: January 2013 through December 2013



Agricultural

Total Systems

Installed



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: One applicant left the country

and the incentive reservation

expired.

$5,123


Program Activities

Program Performance

Jessica Sutorus

[email protected]

94,876.51

16

16


None

None

All systems are inspected before interconnection. All production

meters are read on a monthly basis.

www.coltononline.com


Category Type

Michael TenEyck

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 0 0 0

PBI 1 1 0

Total 1 1 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid for

Reporting Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 3.2 0 3406.24

0 0 0

0 0 0

Non-Profit 0 0 0

Government 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

Total (of all sectors) 3.2 0 3406.24

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

3406.24

Commercial and Residential Solar Rebates



Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

0

0



Utility Name: City of Corona

Program Reporting Period: 1/1/2013-12/31/2013



Agricultural

0

Total Systems

Installed



0

Known customer application issues/applications not approved: 0

0


Program Activities

Program Performance

[email protected]

3406.24

1

0

0

1


0

0

0

www.discovercoronadwp.com

0


Category Type

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 93 78 15

PBI 0 0 0

Total 93 78 15






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 390.325 668,738 951,224.00

0 0 0

456.13 818,328 158,451.42

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 846.455 1,487,066 1,109,675.42

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of

Program)$1,424,799.80 $15,200,000 $6,714,923 17,000


None

No

Not currently

Glendalewaterandpower.com

6


Category Type

1,424,799.80$

72

0

0

78

Total Systems

Installed


Program Activities

Program Performance

HECTOR GUTIERREZ

[email protected]

During this period all customer sectors were fully financially

compensated. The rebate amount has changed per program guidelines,

they are currently $1.73/watt for residential, $0.199/kWh for

commercial and $2.16/watt for affordable housing customers.

During the period between January 2013 and December 2013, GlendaleWater & Power provided rebates to 78 applicants representing 846 kWof installed capacity and approximately 2,360887 kWh in generation.These applications represent 78 residential, 2 affordable housing and10 Commercial installations. GWP continues to receive a high volumeof calls from interested customers. Currently this program is well knownby our customers, and the various solar companies working in Glendale.

0

Known customer application issues/applications not approved: Customer decides not to install

due to financial constraints.

617,071.42

Industrial

Mixed-Use

0

0



Utility Name: GLENDALE WATER & POWER

Program Reporting Period: 2013 Calendar Year



Agricultural

0



Reserved

Commercial



Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI

PBI

Total 0 0 0


Existing Buildings




Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid for

Reporting Year Installations


Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 0 0.00 $0.00

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal (Life of

Program)

$0.00 $435,000.00 $411,125.04 350 kW


none

There was no additional training or special assistance provided to

builders or installers.

All sites are subject to an energy audit prior to reservation of SB1 funds and 100%

of systems are inspected by a third-party (post-installation) to verify that the

system performance matches the EPBB inputs.

http://www.gridley.ca.us/sites/default/files/files/Documents/el

ectric-department


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Mark Gosvener

[email protected]

$0.00

0

Total Systems

Installed



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: none

$0.00



Utility Name: City of Gridley




Agricultural

No new applications were received and no rebates were paid for systems

installed in the City's service territory.

Future Opportunities and Challenges:Gridley has continued to be hit hard by the current economic downturn. Many

residents are unemployed/underemployed and cannot afford to make an

investment in a solar system for their home or business. An improved economy

provides the best hope for an uptick in customer interest.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 10 10 0

PBI

Total 10 10 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 34.95 61232.4 19692

108.74 190512.48 38288

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 143.69 251744.88 57980

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

57980 1,081,000 280283 n/a

Yes, www.ci.healdsburg.ca.us/solarSolar program information on website at:

none

none needed

none

3


Category Type

66677

7

10

Total Systems

Installed


Program Activities

Program Performance

Terry Crowley

[email protected]




42408

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: Healdsburg Electric Department

Program Reporting Period: January 1, 2013 thorugh December 31, 2013



Agricultural

In CY2013 the City interconnected 12 PV systems; 10 residential units

and 2 commercial units.Future Opportunities and Challenges: Program is well developed and functioning.


Reserved

Commercial

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 135 100 35

PBI 25 11 14

Total 160 111 49






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 744 1,411,534 1,330,860

- - -

1,420 3,231,719 1,317,138Non-Profit - - -Government - - -

- - -

- - -

30 58,995 56,696Total (of all sectors) 2,194 4,702,248

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds Remaining kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$2,704,694 $40,219,809 $25,194,558 44 MW

Any training or builder/installer assistance: Contractor and Customer workshops held twice a year (two in Imperial

Valley and two in Riverside County) in preparation of next years program guidelines.

Any auditing of installed systems: System inspections performed at the time system in energized (100%)

Solar program information on website at: www.iid.com/solar

10


Category Type

$3,298,210

85

-

196

Total Systems

Installed


-

--


Program Activities

Program Performance

Javier Camarillo

[email protected]

Summary of Program Activities: Imperial Irrigation District offers rebates to residential and non-residential

customers that install qualifying photovoltaic generation systems. During this reporting period, IID paid out 13

Performance Based Incentive (PBI) payments and 86 Expected Performance Based Incentive (EPBI) payments. IID

maintained the system size cap of 15 kW (residential), 300 kW (commercial), and 400 kW (government/non-profits)

set in 2010 to allow for an increased number of participants. The district promotes the PV/Solar Solutions program

through a variety of channels including our website, community events and workshops.

Future Opportunities: Imperial Irrigation District continues to make changes to ensure program success. These

changes include modifications to program requirements, rebate caps and verification of installed equipment. Future

adjustments to incentive rate could improve customer participation. The IID's program guidelines comply with SB1

mandates and are consistent with the CEC's Guidelines for California Solar Electric Incentive Programs.

Challenges: High demand for this program resulting in full subscription of 2013 funding.

2,704,694

Known customer application issues/applications not approved: A total of 32 residential applications were

cancelled; seven due to incomplete applications, fifteen due to missed Milestone stage deadline, five due to financial

reasons, 2 due to no specified reason, one due to decision to apply the following year, and one due to roofing issues.

Non PV solar systems installed: Zero

Utility Name: Imperial Irrigation District

Program Reporting Period: January 1, 2013 - December 31, 2013


Agricultural

-


Reserved

Commercial

$4,477,429

Industrial

Mixed-Use

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 0 0 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 0 0 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations


0 0 -$

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 0 0 0

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

0 500,000$ 500,000$ 264

Known customer application issues:

NA



Utility Name: City of Industry




Agricultural

City of Industry is currently establishing a solar incentive program to be

submitted for City Council approval.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: Industry has flat time-of-use rate and competitive rate structure which has

made customer owned PV uneconomic.


Reserved


0

Potential issues caused by solar installations on rooftops has discouraged

warehouse owners from allowing the installation of rooftop PV systems.

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Program Activities

Program Performance

Richard Mrlik

[email protected]

None


Zero

None

0


Category Type

-$

0

Total Systems

Installed

Commercial

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 0 0 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 0 0 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

Non-Profit 0 0 0

Government 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0


Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

0 1400000 1107217 1.6MW

Solar program information on website at: www.lmud.org

0


Category Type

10759

0

0

0

0

Total Systems

Installed


Program Activities

Program Performance

Theresa Phillips

[email protected]



0


0

Industrial

Mixed-Use

0

0

Any training or builder/installer assistance: No

Any auditing of installed systems: N/A

Utility Name: Lassen MUD

Program Reporting Period: 2013



Agricultural

0

Lassen did not receive any solar rebate applications for the reporting

period.Future Opportunities and Challenges: Lassen continues to provide opportunities for substantial rebates

across all customer sectors. Factors such as the extremely low median

household income a 12 cent kWh rate and the cost of solar, most

customers cannot afford rooftop solar.


Reserved

Commercial

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 25 25

PBI

Total 25 25






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 83.68 150,624 139,146.94$

69.387 124,897 117,804.78$

Non-Profit 4.783 8,609 9,279.02$

Government

for previously installed syst 150,000.00$

Total (of all sectors) 157.85 284,130 416,230.74$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

416,231$ 6,100,000$ 2,836,002$


None.

None.

All systems pre- and post-inspected by City of Lodi and Lodi Electric

Utility.

www.lodielectric.com

5


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Melissa Price

[email protected]

416,231$

21

annual pmnt

27

Total Systems

Installed



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: None.

3,263,998$



Utility Name: Lodi Electric Utility




Agricultural

1

The 2013 Lodi Solar Rebate Program included the installation of 27

residential and commercial systems, with an installed capacity of

approximately 158 kW.

Future Opportunities and Challenges:None.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 25 20 5

PBI 1 1

Total 26 21 5






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 68.463 122,400

66.55 117990 78903

8.144 14214 20361

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 143.157 254,604 99264

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

149,264 1,746,000 1,008,000

http://www.cityoflompoc.com/utilities/conservation/

A total of 143 Kw of solar was installed during 2013, mostly for

residential buildings. One sytem was installed in a commercial building.



Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: City of Lompoc




Agricultural

Total Systems

Installed




22,000


Program Activities

Program Performance

Mary Kammer

[email protected]

99,264

19

1

21

Solar program information on website at: http://www.cityoflompoc.com/utilities/conservation/

1


Category Type

Contact Persons: Rafik Gendy


Utility Name: City of Los Angeles Department of Water

and Power Email Addresses: [email protected]


The LADWP Solar Incentive Program (SIP) received an average of 380 solar incentive applications a month in 2013,

compared to 310 a month in 2012. The majority of applications received were for residential retrofit projects.

LADWP facilitated the interconnection of 33 MegaWatts (MW) of solar energy systems in 2013, equating to

approximately 54 GigaWatthours of solar energy generation, bringing the total customer-owned solar capacity on

the LADWP grid to 97 MW as of December 31, 2013. Approximately $39.8M in incentives were paid in 2013,

raising total program expenditures for incentives to $178M.

LADWP budgets $288M for incentive payments and $25M for administration and outreach. Funding for incentive

payments is divided evenly between residential and non-residential customers. As of June 2013, approximately

$42.5M remains for residential customers and $8M for non-residential customers. LADWP limits fiscal year

reservations for residential and non-residential applicants to $20M each. The program was suspended in August

2012 after the confirmation of $20M of non-residential incentive applications. The non-residential program

reopened for the last time in July 2013 with approximately $15M worth of funding.

On June 19, 2013, the LADWP Board of Water and Power Commissioners approved a set of major changes to the

SIP to be effective July 15, 2013, which include streamlining measures and reductions to the incentive level offered

to customers who transfer ownership of the Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) to LADWP. The California Energy

Commission (CEC) recently adopted RPS Enforcement Procedures that adversely affect the value of RECs acquired

through the SIP. The CEC has declared that RECs acquired through the SIP are classified as Portfolio Content

Category 3, which are worth significantly less than RECs classified as Portfolio Content Category 1. Thus, LADWP

has adjusted the additional REC incentive available for customers from $0.40/W to $0.05/W.


Accommodating the growing demand for residential solar incentives continues to be a challenging task for

LADWP. LADWP has made great strides by transitioning the SIP to PowerClerk, a web-based solar application tool,

but there is still room for improvements across the various stages of the incentive process. The influx of the

numerous solar leasing entities in Los Angeles has significantly increased customer interest in solar. Approximately

70% of solar incentive applications received in 2013 were for leased solar systems. Providing an acceptable

turnaround time for reservation reviews, solar inspections, and payment processing with the increasing demand

for solar will be a challenging but absolutely necessary task for LADWP.

Due to the popularity of the LADWP Solar Incentive program, we are receiving a substantial amount of incentive

applications to process. This amount of applications causes backlogs in Reservation Request reviews. In efforts to

enhance program experience and reduce processing delays, LADWP has hired and reallocated additional staff to

help streamline the SIP Process. This will improve the overall process time and improve the level of service to our

customers.


Program Activities

Total

Number

of Apps

Rcvd Apps Approved

Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 4542 4220 322

PBI 0 0 0

Total 4542 4220 322






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 20,407 33,671,550 16,625,121$

19 31,350 14,974$

5,617 9,268,050 6,923,221$

Non-Profit 2,263 3,733,950 3,383,461$

Government 6,232 10,282,800 8,388,503$

Total (of all sectors) 4,191 34,538 56,987,700 35,335,280$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)


(Life of Program)

39,769,949$ 313,000,000$ 51,447,000$ 280 MW


LADWP does not offer any formal training for solar installers/builders on solar technology or installation. However,

reference documentation is available on the LADWP solar website (www.ladwp.com/solar) which provides solar

installation tips, common mistakes/violations found on solar installations, and sample solar electrical drawings.

No formal training or education is offered by LADWP to solar installers or builders. LADWP does support education

and training through the local Community College District and Electrical Training Institute of Southern California.


Every solar installation within the City of Los Angeles is inspected by both the Los Angeles Department of Building

and Safety and LADWP. These inspections verify compliance with local regulations and LADWP Electric Service

Requirements, and determine the final incentive payment.


www.ladwp.com/solar

48


Category Type


None


Most cancellations and rejections are due to incompleteness and failure to submit required documentation.

Approximately 7% of the applications submitted in 2013 were cancelled or rejected.

Commercial

Industrial

202,911,278$

4100

4

Total Systems

Installed


12

58,641,722$

Agricultural

27


Reserved

Mixed-Use

Program Performance


Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 35 31 4

PBI

Total 35 31 4






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 137 255,689.00 193,200.00$

2.7 4,897.00 8,400.00$

39 67,000.00 177,663.00$

Non-Profit

Government

88 148,875.00 70,000.00$

Total (of all sectors) 266.7 476,461.00 449,263.00$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)


(Life of Program)

449,263.00$ $450,000/yr. $450,000/yr. 4.7 MW


none

one-on-one installer meetings.

Random internal reviews.

www.mercedid.org/index.cfm/power/solar/

2


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

VANESSA LARA

[email protected]

27

1

31

Total Systems

Installed



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: Applications reported above as

rejected/cancelled were cancelled

at the request of the customer due

to financial issues on the

customer's part.

0



Utility Name: MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT

Program Reporting Period: CY 2013



Agricultural

Customer outreach at public events. Solar pamphlet distribution.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: Our rebate amount per watt AC is still relatively high compared to other

utilities. This has made the program extremely attractive. Increased

customer participation poses a challenge too.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

1

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 258 258 0

PBI 3 3 0

Total 261 261 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 1,239 2,095,040 $1,095,467

0 0 0

519 930,524 $79,470

Non-Profit 0 0 0

Government 0 0 0

0 0 0

19 31,391 $17,080

0 0 0

Total (of all sectors) 1,777 3,056,955 $1,192,017

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$4,416,653 $31,267,973 $26,679,972 30 MW

MID saw a huge increase in solar activity within our service area in 2013.

Residential solar installations increased four fold with 258 homes

receiving PV incentives with an installed capacity of just over 1.2 Mwac.

MID also saw a very large increase in leased (non-rebated) residential

systems, with 82 such installations.


The increased PV activity in 2013 created staffing workload issues. The

huge increase in PV incentive and NEM applications affected many

different departments within the organization including Customer

Services, Engineering, Meter & Billing in addition to Energy Services.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

0

3



Utility Name: Modesto Irrigation District




Agricultural

0

Total Systems

Installed



0

Known customer application issues/applications not approved: No signifcant issues.

$5,897,329


Program Activities

Program Performance

Mike Zweifel

[email protected]

$4,588,001

249

0

0

261


N/A

Not at this time.

All PV installations are physically inspected to insure compliance of

program rules and guidelines.

http://www.mid.org/rebates/solar/default.html

9


Category Type

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 42 42 0

PBI

Total 42 42 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 211 359666 408675

Non-Profit

Government


Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$473,353.01 N/A N/A N/A

Solar rebate program based on fiscal year - rebate for 2012/13 =

$2.25/watt - rebate for 2013/14 = $2/wattFuture Opportunities and Challenges:


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: Moreno Valley Electric Utility

Program Reporting Period: Jan - Dec 2013



Agricultural

Total Systems

Installed




N/A


Program Activities

Program Performance

Michelle Pierce

[email protected]

$503,104.01

42

42

Solar program information on website at: www.moval.org


Category Type

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 8 5 3

PBI

Total 8 5 3






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 43 377,293 50,000

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 43 377,293 50,000

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

50,000 500,000 200,000 2% of thermal



Utility Name: CITY OF NEEDLES

Program Reporting Period: 1/1/2013 to 12/31/2013



Agricultural

Continue disbursing $20,000 in solar rebates

Future Opportunities and Challenges:Inability to fund all applicants due to lack of financial strength


Reserved

Commercial




None

Industrial

Mixed-Use


Program Activities

Program Performance

DAVID BROWNLEE

[email protected]


None

None

Yes

No


Category Type

50,000

5

5

Total Systems

Installed

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 97 94

PBI 6 6

Total 103 100






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations


55.1 96,728 33,253$

Non-Profit 33.3 55,762 77,886$

Government


Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

974,777$ 13,000,000$ 7,069,052$ 6.5 MW



Utility Name: City of Palo Alto Utilities

Program Reporting Period: 1/1/13- 12/31/13



Agricultural

1

Program participation doubled from 2012 levels.

40% of the 2013 applications will be third-party owned.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: Working on a transition plan for suporting solar after the rebates are

fully reserved.


Reserved

Commercial




4,386,536$

Industrial

Mixed-Use


Program Activities

Program Performance

Lindsay Joye

[email protected]


1 solar water heating system installed in affordable multi-family

building

Offered 2 residential workshops and one solar homes

tour.

15 of the 75 installations were inspected by a third-party inspector.

www.cityofpaloalto.org/pvpartners

2


Category Type

1,103,216$

72

75

Total Systems

Installed

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 161 155 6

PBI 1 1 0

Total 162 156 6






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 434 684,623 585,000.00$

2 2,851 6,172.00$

26 47,431 36,187.00$Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 462 734,905

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

2,461,951 16,000,000 4,379,404 14,000 kW


N/A

Assistance to installers is provided over the phone via

PWP's Program Answerline at 626.744.6970

PWP staff inspected 100% of solar installations

WWW.PWPweb.com/solar

4


Category Type

2,705,095

88

1

93

Total Systems

Installed


Program Activities

Mauricio Mejia

[email protected]



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: Duplicate applications

5,449,710

627,359.00$

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: Pasadena Water and Power

Program Reporting Period: January 1 to December 31, 2013



Agricultural

Insterest in solar power continues to remain strong in Pasadena

especially in the residential sector. In addition, solar leases account for

more than half of residential applications.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: PWP switched from paper-based applications to an online application

process system via Powerclerk in August 2013. Dealing with

inexperienced installers remains our greatest challenge.


Reserved

Commercial

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 6 6 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 6 6 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations


Non-Profit

Government


Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

28,587$ 150,000$ 88,413 250kW



Utility Name: Pittsburg Power Company dba Island Energy




Agricultural

Continue to increase the penetration level of solar PV systems in commercial and

residential sectors on Mare Island, Vallejo.Future Opportunities and Challenges: Administer newly implemented NEM program; Support effort to count distributed

solar as "Category 1" RPS resource.

Total Expenditures Incentives Reserved

Commercial



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: Oversized system

0

Industrial

Mixed-Use


Program Activities

Program Performance

Vanessa Xie

[email protected]


None

None

City of Vallejo Inspection and Utility Final Inspection

www.islandenergy.com


Category Type

28,587

6

6

Total Systems Installed

Utility Name: Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 13 13 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 13 13 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 63.57 115,514 72,057.20$

0 0 0

0 0 0

Non-Profit 0 0 0

Government 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

Total (of all sectors) 63.57 115,514 72,057.20$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

72,057.20$ 2,060,000 N/A N/A

N/A

N/A

0


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Corby Gardner

[email protected]

225,641.00$

13

0

0

13

Any auditing of installed systems: Verification of each system is completed during meter replacement. Energy

audit surveys are also required with the application.

Total Systems

Installed



0

Known customer application issues/applications not approved: N/A

0

0





Agricultural

0

Solar program information on website at: www.psrec.coop NOTE: PSREC is an electric cooperative. This report

is provided voluntarily to comply with the intent of SB1.

Provided rebates and educational information to encourage PV

installation.Future Opportunities and Challenges: PSREC is pursuing a community solar installation.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

0

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 0 0 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 0 0 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid for

Reporting Year

Installations


Non-Profit

Government 211.191 553,320.42$

Total (of all sectors) 211.191 0 553,320.42$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)


(Life of Program)

553,320.42$ 1,030,000$ 476,679.58$ N/A

Port has an attractive SB 1 (solar) rebate program. However, the electric

customers have not taken advantage of Port's rebate program. On

December 12, 2012, we received an application from FAA for the solar

rebate. They have installed a 250 KW system. The total AC output of the

system is 211,191 Watts. They are requesting a $639,908.73 rebate (this

is based on our 2010 rebate rates for PV). Since they completed their

construction in 2012, the maximum they would be entitled to is

$553,320.42 (this is based on our 2012 rebate for PV). They came online

in 2013 and the payments were made towards the end of 2013.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: Since Port's customer base is 100% commercial, their interest is to

promote their business interest instead of energy savings.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: Port of Oakland




Agricultural

Total Systems

Installed



1


0


Program Activities

Program Performance

Anthony Kekulawela

[email protected]

1

Solar program information on website at: http://www.portofoakland.com/environm/programs.asp


Category Type

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 2 2 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 2 2 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations


16.9 29284 38052

Non-Profit

Government 7 11615 0


Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

38,052 1,250,000 1,078,056.99 1,190kW

Two customers completed installation in 2013 and two customer applications

were received with installation being completed in 2014.

Future Opportunities and Challenges:Continue promoting the rebate rates to encourage customer participation.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility




Agricultural

Total Systems

Installed



1


59,186


Program Activities

Program Performance

Trina Valdez

[email protected]

97,238

2


None

None

Secondary meters are installed to capture total system generation. Audits

are performed after a full year of data has been recorded.http://www.cityofrc.us/cityhall/engineering/rcmu/rebates/rene

wable.asp

1


Category Type

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Calendar Year 2013

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 0 0 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 0 0 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 76.5 106,906 0

0 0 0

16.81 23,757 0

Non-Profit 0 0 0

Government 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

Total (of all sectors) 93 130,663 -

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

0 10,233,000$ $4,872,862 6.5 MW

Solar program information on website at: reupower.com

2


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Mike Adams

[email protected]

1,135,364$

10

0

0

12



0


$2,663,453



Utility Name: Redding Electric Utility

Program Reporting Period:



Agricultural

0

REU's solar rebate program was suspended through calendar year

2013, yet solar PV interconnection requests continue to filter in, in

spite of the lack of REU solar rebates.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: REU will open solar PV rebates again in August 2014.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

0

0

Total Systems

Installed

Contact Person:

Email Address:


In reporting year 2013, Riverside Public Utilities (RPU) continued to experience high demand for it's solar rebate

program and installation of solar systems. RPU's solar rebate program has assisted 618 customers with the

installation of solar systems through the end of 2013.

On June 5, 2012 RPU reopened the PV incentive program offering rebate levels at $2.25 per AC watt installed up to

50% of projects costs and capped at $14,000 for residential and $2.25 per AC watt installed up to 50% of project

costs and capped at $20,000, $60,000 and $125,000 for flat rate, demand rate and TOU rate commercial customers

respectively and began taking reservations for the FY 12/13 program year funding cycle. Both the residential and

the commercial programs were fully subscribed on September 27, 2012.

In June, 2013 RPU reopened the PV incentive program offering rebate levels at $2.00 per AC watt installed up to

50% of project costs and capped at $13,000 for residential and $2.00 per AC watt installed up to 50% of project

costs and capped at $15,000, $45,000, $100,000 for flat rate, demand rate and TOU rate commercial customers

respectively and began taking reservations for the FY 13/14 program year funding cycle. Both the residential and

the commercial programs were fully subscribed the same day the program opened.

During the reporting period program demand has exceeeded available funding. The unprecedented response to the

program re-opening indicates the demand for solar is increasing and being accepted as a viable alternative energy

source. Continued reductions in PV system hardware and installation costs as well as alternative financing sources,

such as the HERO (PACE) program, have expanded participation and increased affordabillity for installing PV

systems. RPU also began to see a significant increase in customers installing PV systems without the assistance of a

utility rebate incentive. In 2013, one hundred and four (104) residential homes installed PV systems within RPU's

service territory without requesting a reservation nor submitting an application for a PV rebate.

As a State designated Emerald City, RPU is continually marketing its PV programs through direct customer contact,

print ads, and electronic media.

Utility Name:


Riverside Public Utilities


Opportunities:

Solar hardware pricing continues to decline and the availability of attractive financing options continues to attract

more residential participation. The incentives per installed watt AC have continued to decline for three years,

however the average residential system sizes have remained fairly steady. The average residential system

installation was 4.74 kW AC, 4.83 kW AC and 4.93 kW AC for 2011, 2012 and 2013 respectively. While the average

residential incentive was $8,608.30, $5,432.13 and $3,901.01 for 2011, 2012 and 2013 respectively. This continues

to support the notion that electrical generation, Federal Tax Credits and expectations of lowered energy bills, rather

than utility rebate incentives are driving customer decisions to install residential PV systems.

In 2013, 104 residential customers installed solar without an incentive compared to only 26 residential customers in

2012. This is further evidence that decreasing PV system costs, alternative financing tools along with the 30%

Federal Tax Credit, have combined to make installing a PV system a mainstream option for many homeowners who

can afford it. There are also opportunities in the future for creating a community solar program for those

customers where it is not feasible or practical to install solar at their residence or business.


Program Activities

Gerry Buydos

[email protected]

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 193 175 18

PBI

Total 193 175 18



New Construction Tier I -

New Construction Tier II -


Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 1,405 3,077,519 1,100,085.17$

- - -$

368 806,095 189,617.50$

Non-Profit 20 42,990 -$

Government - - -$

- - -$

- - -$

- - -$

Total (of all sectors) 1,793 3,926,604 1,289,702.67$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)


(Life of Program)

$2,199,825.42 $24,930,000.00 $11,562,230.63 N/A


Reserved

-

292

Commercial 9

Industrial

Challenges:

Solar program demand continues to exceed available local funding for both residential and non-residential PV

programs.

While the average commercial installation has increased in 2013 to 40.89 kW AC from 20.31 kW AC in 2012

participation continues to be at a much slower pace than residential PV systems with only nine (9) commercial

installations completed in the 2013 reporting cycle. Commercial PV systems are much more costly and often face

greater technical, structural or permitting challenges. Furthermore, commercial PV systems rarely offset the

customer's electric demand and therefore the return on investment is often much longer than comparable

residential PV systems. In addition, many commercial customers lease rather than own their own buildings and

landlords are not motivated to install PV since utility costs are often passed on to the tenant in their lease costs.

Trending growth in the local economy may encourage additional commercial customers to consider PV installations.

-

$1,983,398.00

Agricultural

Mixed-Use

-

-

$2,199,825.42


1


282

-

Category Type

Program Performance

Total Systems

Installed


We had 18 reservations cancelled at the customer's request.


RPU provides PV project support and assistance to all contractors and customers who request help with technical

support, rebate application processing and permitting issues. RPU has also created strong relationships with local

and regional installers and contractors.


The City of Riverside inspects every installed PV system and audits all commercial facilities and residential homes

during the rebate application process, except new construction. New construction must provide required Title 24

reports in-lieu of energy audits. Public agencies within the service territory that install PV systems are not subject to

City of Riverside review and approval.


www.greenriverside.com

www.greenriverside.com/residential

www.greenriverside.com/business


None.


Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 137 133 4

PBI 5 5 0

Total 142 138 4






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid for

Reporting Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 441 733,700 339,174$

272 451,150 -

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 713 1,184,850

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds Remaining

(against Target)

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$425,353 9,468,429$ 3,884,974$ 0

Any auditing of installed systems: RE performs M&V on all installed systems prior to payment of rebate.

www.roseville.ca.us/electricSolar program information on website at:

None

None

6


$425,353


Agricultural

Residential systems, some are over sized

and require re design, some contractors do

not comply with interconnection

requirements.

339,174.00$



$660,000

Total Expenditures

Residential retrofit and new construction solar. Commercial systems under 10kW

and performance based systems > 10kW.Expanding market with leasing and PPA's, contractors are not very experienced, do

not have proper tools for shading analysis and cut corners on required

documentation.


Program Activities

Program Performance

Renee Laffey

[email protected]

Utility Name: Roseville Electric

Program Reporting Period: 2013



Category TypeTotal Systems

Installed



Incentives

Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

132

138

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Utility Name: Sacramento Municipal Utility District

Program Reporting Period: Jan. 1, 2013 thru Dec. 31, 2013


Program Activities

Jim Barnett

[email protected]

Summary of Program Activities:SMUD continued administering the SB1 solar PV incentive program for residential, commercial, new homes through the SolarSmart program, SolarShares and

multi-family affordable housing through a pilot virtual net metering program. Program efforts focused on:

• Educating customers with information and informational material via the SMUD

website, through one-on-one communications with customers and by participating in

workshops, conferences, webinars, etc.

• Managing incentive application intake and approval communications through the

PowerClerk Incentive platform.

• Performing interconnection reviews and inspections for 100% of the projects

installed.

• Administering EPBI payments and monthly or quarterly PBI payment disbursements

through the PowerClerk Incentive platform and SAP.

• Participating in the effort to redesign NEM customer billing and invoices with an

implementation target date of late 2015.

• Pursuing process improvements to increase program management and

administration efficiency and effectiveness which includes program communications,

stakeholder collaboration, business planning, reporting, and exchange of data

between IT systems and solutions.

Program Highlights:

• Commercial Retrofit

• Began the reporting period offering Step 7 incentives ($0.65/watt EPBI,

$0.10/kWh PBI). By the end of the reporting period the incentives were reduced to

Step 10 ($0.20/watt EPBI)

• Customer interest in PV remains high but SMUD’s low rates contributed to lower

than expected project completions

• PBI payments continue to run higher than initially anticipated. Systems are

generating more than they would using 30-year average weather data.

• Residential Retrofit

• January 2013 - began the year in Step 7 ($0.65/watt EPBI)

• March 2013 - incentive reduction from Step 7 to Step 8

• May 2013 – incentive reduction from Step 8 to Step 9

• August 2013 – incentive reduction from Step 9 to Step 10

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 1495 1482 124

PBI 3 5 3

Total 1498 1487 127






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 7,180 10,199,597 5,569,264$

- - -$

1,245 1,872,646 301,802$

Non-Profit 959 1,474,350 559,608$

Government 2,236 3,786,797 254,814$

999 1,531,912 123,474$

- - -$

81 120,962 48,863$

Total (of all sectors) 12,701 18,986,264 6,857,825$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

26,295,000$ 130,000,000$ 57,243,849$ 125 MW


Agricultural

5


Commercial


7

46,576,943$

9

1,912

-

Industrial

Mixed-Use

2

-

Total Systems

Installed

Program Performance

Future Opportunities and Challenges:• Declining incentive levels had little impact on the growth rate of project activity in the residential

retrofit market. Project activity has noticeably decreased in the commercial retrofit market since the

incentives dropped from Step 7 ($0.65 per Watt) to Step 10 ($0.20 per Watt).

• The new housing market in the Sacramento region exhibited upward momentum in new housing starts

in 2013. New residential construction with solar as a standard participating through the SMUD

SolarSmart program saw a +300% increase over the previous year.

• The solar leasing business model continues to capture a prominent share of the market for financing

residential solar PV systems. While the majority of the observed growth in solar leasing is in the

residential retrofit market the solar leasing business model has made significant inroads into the new

residential construction market (single family homes). The concern is regarding the apparent

tendency for the solar lease sector of the PV market to distort the true cost of installation due to solar

leasing service providers “optimization” of the federal investment tax credits. The benefit to the

customer is a set monthly payment that on an annual basis provides net utility bill savings, compared

to a variable payment based on actual production, such as in a power purchase agreement, that

produces net annual savings that are difficult to determine. It is anticipated that solar leasing will

continue to dominate the residential retrofit solar PV market. Solar leasing is also being increasingly

adopted in the new residential construction market as home builders look for ways to remain

competitive. Solar leasing allows the home builders to exclude the cost of the solar PV system from the

total cost of the new home thereby keeping these new solar homes price competitive. When the new

solar home is purchased, the solar lease is assigned to the new home owner becoming their

responsibility to manage.

• PV system installation costs continue to decline. The solar PV market is moving closer to achieving the

goal of maturing into a subsidy free PV marketplace, especially for high energy use residential

customers. For commercial customers, SMUD’s low electricity tariff rates coupled with risk adverse

financing options seem to be holding back a more widespread penetration of solar PV into the

commercial market, especially for small and medium sized business. Another factor is that most small

and medium size business are predominantly tenants in buildings that they do not own nor control,

thereby making the installation of a solar PV system a difficult proposition.

• Strategies continue to be explored to reduce time and costs for PV project permitting and grid

interconnection approval, including the coordination of related activities with building department and

permitting officials.

• Customer education and awareness will continue to play a large part of SMUD’s role in the solar PV

marketplace. The development and implementation of SMUD’s Solar Map and other web based

customer self-service tools is a continuing priority. Efforts will include developing and implementing

enhancements to SMUD’s website to provide a superior online information resource for customers

11

Category Type

9,081,825$

1,878

Solar program information on website at:https://www.smud.org/en/residential/environment/solar-for-your-home/

https://www.smud.org/en/business/environment/solar-for-your-business/index.htm

https://smud.powerclerk.com/Default.aspx

https://www.smud.org/en/business/environment/solar-for-your-business/solarshares.htm

https://www.smud.org/en/residential/environment/solarsmart-homes/

https://www.smud.org/en/about-smud/environment/renewable-energy/community-solar.htm

Known customer application issues/applications not approved:• Installation issues continue with residential retrofit installs due to employee churn and new contractors entering the market. One notable issue continues

being the lack of installing a neutral wire from the PV production meter to the breaker panel. PV production meter placement also continues to be a

contractor challege despite drawing, discussions, marks on wall, etc. Large turnover in installation staff seems to be the norm and educating installers

continues to be challenging.

• Increased application intake has increased approval time from days to up to 3 weeks.

• The effects of AB 920 continues to stress solar staff resources with customer reaction and confusion with net-metering billing procedures and presentment.

Bill presentment redesigns have helped some. Major overhaul is expected to be in place sometime in 2016.

Any training or builder/installer assistance:• SMUD held one 3 day training session in October 2013 to prepare participants for the NABCEP certification test. The class was taught by Bill Brooks from

Brooks Engineering. This is an advanced solar PV training class for code compliance design and installation of solar PV systems.

• SMUD held a training session in September 2013 on benchmarking with the EPA's Portfolio Manager tool.

• SMUD solar PV system inspectors provide continuous guidance, advice and instructions to solar vendors/installers operating within the SMUD service

territory as part of the solar PV system installation inspections, as well as solar system plan reviews.

• The SMUD website provides customer access to PV information and financing to help customers during the decision making process to invest in solar.

Contractors also use the site for program documents and updates.

• SMUD hosted it's first Energy Expo on Saturday June 1st. Contractor representatives and SMUD classes about solar and energy efficiency were held

throughout the day. More than 300 people attended.

Any auditing of installed systems:• As a routine part of program operations, SMUD performs post installation inspections of every solar PV system that applies for incentives and requests

interconnection to operate in parallel with the electric grid.

• PV Check (part of the Clean Power Research tools) allows sytem-wide performance monitoring to identify underperforming systems.



Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI N/A N/A N/A

PBI N/A N/A N/A

Total 194 194 0


Existing Buildings N/A

New Construction Tier I N/A

New Construction Tier II N/A


Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 301.7 396,444 $319,250

78.1 102,623 $536,025

156.6 205,772 $51,357

Non-Profit 306.2 402,347 $261,093

Government 101 132,714 $559,922

Total (of all sectors) 944 1,239,901 $1,727,647

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$1,727,647 $25,460,838 $5,000,000 N/A


None

On-the-job training (OJT) program provided participating

installation companies 50% of the wages (up to $5,000)

paid to GoSolarSF hires during the training period.

Yes. For municipal projects, SFPUC conducts full inspection and

commissioning. For GoSolarSF projects, SFPUC conducts an inspections

on a case-by-case basis following CSI guidelines.

GoSolarSF Website

15


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Michael Hyams

[email protected]

$1,727,647

120

54

195

Total Systems

Installed



1

N/A


Quarterly allowances were implemented for each budget type (non-profit, business and residential (excl. low

income), low income residential). If the cap was reached before the end of the quarter, applications were accepted

again on the first business day of the next quarter. Quarterly budget allowances were often met within the first

month of the quarter.



Utility Name: SFPUC




Agricultural

5

The SFPUC directly installs, maintains and operates solar PV systems on

municipal buildings throughout the City and County of San Francisco.

The SFPUC's GoSolarSF program provides incentives to residents,

businesses, and non-profit organizations to install solar PV systems on

their premises.



Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 9 4 5

PBI

Total 9 4 5






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid for Reporting Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 43.16 74,546 $82,695.55

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 43.16 74,546 $82,695.55

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds Remaining kW/MW Goal (Life of Program)

$82,695.55 $2,510,000.00 $2,187,309.41 2,240 kW


none

none

All sites are subject to an energy audit prior to reservation of SB1 funds and 100% of systems are

inspected by a third-party (post-installation) to verify that system performance matches the EPBB inputs.

http://www.ci.shasta-lake.ca.us/index.aspx?NID=874


Category Type

$92,004.90

10

10

Total Systems

Installed


Program Activities

Program Performance

Mark Gosvener

[email protected]



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: Five (5) applications received during CY2013 were not

approved for fund reservation. At the beginning of the

FY13/FY14 budget cycle, the program was closed until

further notice because the City's was no longer in a place to

use PB fund reserves to pay solar rebates before the actual

revenues were collected. The City hopes to earmark funds

needed to re-open the program in the future.

$9,750.00

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: City of Shasta Lake




Agricultural

Nine (9) new applications were received during CY2013, of which four (4) projects were approved and five

(5) projects were not done (customer's choice) as a result of the City's decision to close the Solar Rebate

Program until further notice due to a lack of funding. Ten (10) solar pv systems were installed in the City's

service territory and rebated under the PV Buydown Program during CY2013 (compared to 3 systems

during CY2012).

Future Opportunities and Challenges: The State of California's relentless attack on its load serving entities and distribution providers is making

the consumption of electrical energy unaffordable. The City and its patrons cannot afford to invest in

energy efficiency and weatherization, renewable energy, roof top solar energy, carbon free energy, and

absorb the increasing cost to regulate all of these endevours while maintaining a reliably smart electrical

energy grid.


Commercial

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 51 51 0

PBI 2 2 0

Total 53 53 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 154 244408 404,138

161 241887 179348

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 315 486295 583,486.00

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

3777176 31500000 10049825 30 MW

Overall installations and application in 2013 were slightly lower than in

previous years amongst both residential and commercial customers. There

were no large Commercial solar systems installed or reserved in 2013.


Coming in the next year we are expecting to see at least two new housing

projects that will be incorporating solar into several of the units during

construction. This is a new space for us as nearly all of our solar systems to-

date have been retro-fit installations, but we working with the builders on

ensuring the systems are right-sized for the unit size and projected load.


Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: Silicon Valley Power, City of Santa Clara




Agricultural

Total Systems Installed



Known customer application issues/applications not approved: We did not deny any

applications this year, and

interest still remains high in the

program, although overall

applications are down slightly

from previous years.

21450175


Program Activities

Program Performance

Leslie Brown

[email protected]

3843485

42

48


N/A

We did not hold any formal trainings but we do work with

builders and installers one on one if/when they have any issues

with the application or permitting process or if they are new to

working in our service territory.

We audit approximate 90% of the systems installed with performance

verification. SVP has a staff member who is HERS certified to perform solar

inspections.

http://siliconvalleypower.com/solar

6


Category Type

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI

PBI

Total






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 4.5 10,640 5,070

Non-Profit

Government


Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)


(Life of Program)

$5,070 $212,957 $57,043 400kW


None

No

None


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Paul Hauser/Kellie Haigh

phauser/[email protected]

6,012

1

1

Total Systems

Installed




0



Utility Name: Trinity Public Utilities District




Agricultural



Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 22 14 9

PBI 0 0 0

Total 22 14 9






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate 38.7 59,218.39 $96,429

0 0

13 21,997.00 $14,750

Non-Profit 0 0

Government 0 0

0 0

0 0

9.5 14,028.10 $14,750

Total (of all sectors) 61.2 95,243.49 $125,928.78

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

$125,928.78 $1,773,408.00 $1,031,065.00 337


N/A

No

Yes

www.tdpud.org; Conservation; Solar/Photovoltaics

1


Category Type


Program Activities

Program Performance

Kathy Neus

[email protected]

$168,889.15

12

0

1

14

Total Systems

Installed



0

Known customer application issues/applications not approved: some needed new roofs, orientation of the home was not conducive for solar

$211,478.78



Utility Name: Truckee Donner Public Utility District

Program Reporting Period: January 1, 2013 -December 31, 2013



Agricultural

0

Program has been written up in the local independent newspaper, solar

installers continually market the District's program, information is provided

at the Memorial Weekend Home Show and the program is available on the

District's website.

Future Opportunities and Challenges: The District's territory is comprised of 55% second homeowners and the local

economy is based largely upon the tourist industry. The area continues to be

impacted by weather and the economy.


Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

0

0

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 202 202 Not Tracked

PBI 19 19 Not Tracked

Total 221 221 Not Tracked






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid for

Reporting Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 676.8 1,113,333 891,640$

424.9 673,668 611,109$

56.2 89,199 19,030$

Non-Profit 0 - -$

Government 1182.8 1,991,080 585,738$

2577.4 4,423,476 1,194,900$

1287.4 2,317,094 668,648$

0 - -$

Total (of all sectors) 6205.5 10,607,850 3,971,065$

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

2,657,628$ 23,597,416$ 4,092,845$ 23

Any training or builder/installer assistance: Inspection training is scheduled for 2014

Any auditing of installed systems: Field Post Inspection is completed on 100% of systems

Solar program information on website at: http://www.tid.com/for-home/rebates/solar-rebate-program

2,661,275$ 19,406,549$





Reserved

Commercial 3

0

6

Industrial 9

Agricultural 7

Mixed-Use 0

221

Residential - Affordable/ Low Income 101

Program Activities

Summary of Program Activities: Assist customers that are interested in installing solar.


Program Performance


Category TypeTotal Systems

Installed

95



Utility Name: Turlock Irrigation District Nancy Folly

[email protected]

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 2 2 0

PBI

Total 2 2 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid for Reporting Year

Installations

Residential - Market Rate 3.22 5,440 $3,607.52

Non-Profit

Government

Total (of all sectors) 3.22 5,440 $3,607.52

Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal (Life of Program)

$3,607.52 $1,530,000.00 $1,325,886.64 N/A

Two (2) new applications were received and approved during CY2013. One (1) solar PV

system was installed in the City's service territory and rebated under the PV Buy Down

Program during CY2013 (compared to 4 systems in CY2012).


Solar PV Program activity continued to descrease during CY2013 as a result of the depressed

economy, customer reluctance and/or inability to invest sizeable amounts of capital into

solar PV systems, lack of active solar contractors in the area and decreasing rebate levels.

The City of Ukiah continues to make the availability of our Solar PV rebates known to our

customers; however, it is ultimately up to the customer to make the decision to invest.


Reserved

Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: City of Ukiah




Agricultural

Total Systems

Installed




$5,748.40


Program Activities

Program Performance

Mark Gosvener

[email protected]

$4,835.49

1

1


none

none

All sites are subject to an energy audit prior to reservation of SB1 funds and 100% of systems

are inspected by a third-party (post-installation) to verify that system performance matches

the EPBB inputs.

http://www.cityofukiah.com/pageserver/?page=energy_conserve


Category Type

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 2 2

PBI

Total 2 2






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations


56.1 89,451 109,395$

Non-Profit

Government


Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

109,395$ 16,352,634$ 16,243,239$


none

none

Systems are Pre/Post inspected by VG&E staff & Building Dept

cityofvernon.org/dept/l&p/custsvc/solar

2


Category Type

109,395$

2

Total Systems

Installed


Program Activities

Program Performance

Abraham Alemu

[email protected]




250,000$

Industrial

Mixed-Use



Utility Name: City of Vernon

Program Reporting Period: January1, 2013-December 31, 2013



Agricultural

The City of Vernon installed two 33KW & 23KW solar systems

Future Opportunities and Challenges:Planning to install a 350KW system in 2014


Reserved

Commercial

Contact Person:

Email Address:

Total

Number of


Apps

Rejected/

Cancelled

EPBI 0 0 0

PBI 0 0 0

Total 0 0 0






Installed Capacity

(kW)

Total

Generation

(kWh/yr)

Incentives Paid

for Reporting

Year Installations

Residential - Market Rate n/a n/a n/a

n/a n/a n/a

0 0 0

Non-Profit 0 0 0

Government 0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0


Total Incentives

Paid/Reporting

Year

SB 1 Funding

(Life of Program)

Funds

Remaining

kW/MW Goal

(Life of Program)

0 92000 92000 n/a

Very few inquiries and no applications were received regarding SB 1 and

Victorville's solar rebate program during calendar year 2013.Future Opportunities and Challenges:

Victorville serves only 30 customers, all which are classified as either

commercial, government or industrial (no residential). Program funding is

currently capped at $92,000 with no program applications or expenditures

to date. However, the City Council approved Resolution 14-041 on

6/17/2014, which restored the EPBI and PBI incentive rates to 2008 levels

for calendar years 2014-2017 and eliminated the per-customer spending

cap of $15,000 in an attempt to improve participation. Additionally, staff

recently learned of a potential solar PV project opportunity at the City's

Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant (an electric customer) that will be

evaluated for during fiscal year 2014/2015.


Commercial

Industrial

Mixed-Use

0

0



Utility Name: Victorville Municipal Utility Services




Agricultural

0

Total Systems

Installed



0


0


Program Activities

Program Performance

Jenele Davidson

[email protected]

0

n/a

n/a

0

0


None

No

n/a

http://VMUS.victorvilleca.gov

0


Category Type