This bill amends existing Washington statutes (RCW 19.285.030 and 19.285.040) rather than creating a new chapter. It explicitly allows electricity generated by “qualified biomass energy” facilities located in the Pacific Northwest to be used by qualifying utilities to meet renewable resource requirements under the Energy Independence Act, and it revises and restates many definitions and program terms in RCW 19.285.030 (including definitions for qualified biomass energy, eligible renewable resource, renewable energy credit, distributed generation, nonpower attributes, qualifying utility, and others). The amendments change compliance procedures, targets, and accounting rules in RCW 19.285.040. They require qualifying utilities to assess and post biennial acquisition targets for cost‑effective conservation, allow limited use of excess conservation savings toward future targets (with a combined cap of 25 percent of any biennial target), define “single large facility conservation savings,” and provide special limited rules for certain industrial facilities and cogeneration. Annual renewable targets are set at 3 percent of load for 2012–2015, 9 percent for 2016–2019, and 15 percent from 2020 onward, with distributed generation eligible for double counting in specified circumstances. The bill adds REC accounting rules (including restrictions on freshwater RECs and single-use/retirement of RECs), prohibits counting resources whose RECs are owned by third parties or used in optional pricing programs, provides extra credit (1.2x) for certain post‑2005 facilities that used approved apprenticeship programs, and establishes ownership and transfer limits for RECs associated with qualified biomass facilities (including a January 1, 2016 rule that only utilities that own or are directly interconnected to a qualified biomass facility may use its electricity for compliance). Some provisions and context are incomplete in the extracted text: a sentence about use of single large facility conservation savings was cut off, some definitions and cross-references are cited but not included in full, and a few date references appear inconsistent in isolation (for example, a January 1, 2010 deadline referencing a 2014 regional power plan). The summary is limited to the provided extracts and does not infer missing provisions.

If enacted as shown in these excerpts, utilities that serve more than 25,000 Washington customers will face binding renewable and conservation obligations on a schedule: modest renewable shares in 2012–2019 ramping to 15% by 2020 and an option by 2030 to meet targets with 100% renewable plus nonemitting generation; they must also identify and post cost‑effective conservation potential, set and meet two‑year conservation acquisition targets, and update those assessments regularly. Practically, that means these qualifying utilities will likely need to budget for more purchases or ownership of eligible renewable generation, invest in conservation programs (and possibly spend at least 1% of revenue on renewable resources/RECs to qualify for a compliance exception), promote certain technologies and apprenticeship-linked projects to gain extra credit, and accept limits on how much excess or single‑facility savings can count toward targets. The bill also narrows market options for electricity and RECs from older biomass facilities: after January 1, 2016 only a qualifying utility that owns or is directly interconnected with a qualified biomass facility may use that facility’s electricity for compliance, and industrial hosts may generally transfer RECs only to the directly interconnected qualifying utility, restricting the ability to sell those RECs more broadly. Who is most affected are qualifying utilities, investor‑owned utilities subject to commission review, industrial facilities with on‑site biomass and their local utilities, and customers with high‑efficiency cogeneration; they will see changed options for buying, selling, or counting RECs, altered compliance costs, and new administrative responsibilities. Key implementation details and some limits (for example the full rule on single large facility savings and some cross‑references) are incomplete in these excerpts, so there is uncertainty about exact caps and administrative procedures until the remaining provisions are reviewed.