AB 2369 revises California’s Public Utilities Code to change how the state plans for electric reliability and transmission in support of its clean-energy goals. First, it expands the Public Utilities Commission’s resource adequacy program so that it must recognize a reliability contribution from “energy-only” resources, not just traditional capacity resources, and it expressly adds energy storage to the list of resources that load-serving entities must maintain to meet demand and reliability needs. The bill also directs the commission to value load-modifying demand response in a way that reflects distribution and transmission benefits, and to continue reporting how much of each load-serving entity’s resource adequacy obligation is met with renewable, zero-carbon, or storage resources.
Second, AB 2369 amends the Accelerating Renewable Energy Delivery Act to strengthen transmission planning. It requires the Public Utilities Commission and the Energy Commission, when providing annual transmission guidance to the Independent System Operator, to identify cost-effective opportunities to increase the reliability contribution of planned or existing energy-only resources or reduce congestion through transmission expansions. It also requires the commission, by January 1, 2029, to develop a methodology for evaluating how energy-only resources can help provide charging sufficiency for energy storage, informed by the ISO’s transmission planning process.
The bill’s practical impact is to broaden the state’s reliability framework beyond conventional generation and to integrate storage and energy-only resources more directly into utility planning, procurement, and transmission decisions. It would affect electrical corporations, electric service providers, community choice aggregators, the PUC, the Energy Commission, and the Independent System Operator by changing the standards and analytical tools used to determine resource adequacy and transmission needs. It also reinforces existing state policy favoring renewable energy, zero-carbon resources, and reduced reliance on nonpreferred resources in local capacity areas.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill’s history is strongly supportive. The measure received unanimous committee votes in the available history, including a 16-0 vote to pass as amended and a later 17-0 vote to do pass and re-refer to Appropriations. No committee transcript was provided, but the voting pattern suggests broad agreement with the bill’s reliability and clean-energy planning goals.
There is little visible opposition in the available record, but the bill does contain technical and policy choices that could draw scrutiny. The main points of potential contention are how the PUC should measure the reliability value of energy-only resources, whether adding storage to load-serving entity obligations could increase compliance costs, and how transmission expansions should be prioritized relative to other alternatives. The bill also creates a state-mandated local program through its enforcement provisions, though it states that no reimbursement is required.
AB 2369 would amend Sections 380 and 454.57 of the Public Utilities Code, expanding the PUC’s authority and obligations in resource adequacy and transmission planning. It would require load-serving entities to account for energy storage in meeting reliability obligations, direct the PUC to recognize energy-only resources as contributing to grid reliability, and require annual transmission planning to consider ways to improve the reliability contribution or reduce congestion of energy-only resources. The bill also requires a PUC/ISO methodology by January 1, 2029, for evaluating energy-only resources’ role in charging energy storage, and it would continue to support the state’s renewable and zero-carbon transmission buildout framework.
The available legislative history indicates favorable sentiment and bipartisan or at least unanimous committee support. The bill passed committee with no recorded opposition in the votes provided, suggesting that members generally viewed it as a technical but important update to California’s clean-energy reliability and transmission planning framework. The absence of committee transcript material limits deeper insight into debate, but the vote pattern points to broad agreement.
The main substantive issues are likely to be technical rather than ideological. The bill’s new emphasis on energy-only resources raises questions about how to quantify their reliability value and whether that could alter procurement or transmission priorities. Adding energy storage to load-serving entity adequacy obligations may also raise implementation and cost concerns for utilities, community choice aggregators, and electric service providers. Another possible point of contention is whether transmission planning should prioritize congestion relief and reliability contributions from existing resources versus building new infrastructure or relying on alternative local resources.