SB 500 requires electric and gas utilities serving California buildings to keep at least 12 months of usage records and, on request and authorization, provide aggregated building-level energy usage to building owners or their agents and to ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager or an approved alternative. The bill sets aggregation thresholds and timelines, creates a limited nonconfidential treatment for certain aggregated datasets, and directs the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to adopt rules governing public disclosure and implementation.
The law is a practical tool for expanding building energy benchmarking and municipal benchmarking programs, but it also forces utilities, owners, and regulators to resolve data-aggregation mechanics, privacy limits, and who pays for the operational work of delivering and publishing usage data.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires utilities to retain the most recent 12 full months of building energy usage and, after an owner’s written or secure electronic authorization, deliver aggregated monthly usage for each covered building. It defines covered buildings by account thresholds and creates a fast (four-week) delivery requirement, plus CPUC authority to set public disclosure rules and exemptions.
Who It Affects
Investor‑owned electric and gas utilities, local publicly owned utilities, owners or managers of multi‑meter commercial and large residential properties, energy auditors and benchmarking platforms (like ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager), and municipal benchmarking programs.
Why It Matters
By standardizing when and how utilities must share building‑level usage, SB 500 replaces ad hoc data exchanges with a regulatory framework—clearing a major operational barrier to benchmarking-based energy efficiency. It also raises practical privacy and ratepayer‑cost questions that utilities and the CPUC will need to resolve in implementation.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 500 sets a clear, operational path for building owners and benchmarking programs to obtain twelve months of monthly energy usage aggregated at the building level. It begins by defining which buildings are “covered”: any building without residential utility accounts, or any building with five or more active utility accounts of any kind.
The bill ties the definition of energy to fuels tracked by ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager and allows the CPUC to approve alternative tools, so data formats will center on benchmarking inputs.
The bill requires utilities to keep at least the most recent 12 complete calendar months of usage data and to provide aggregated building usage upon request from an owner or owner’s agent with written or secure electronic authorization. For buildings with three or more active utility accounts, utilities must deliver aggregated monthly usage for the prior 12 months without treating that data as confidential customer information, and the owner and utility are shielded from liability for downstream disclosures.
For covered buildings that do not meet that three‑account threshold, delivery requires consent from the underlying accountholders.Utilities must provide the requested aggregated data within four weeks and at a monthly granularity unless the CPUC specifies otherwise. The CPUC is charged with adopting regulations that lay out which data and building characteristics are needed for benchmarking, which buildings must be publicly disclosed, and which categories are protected from public release—while exempting small buildings (under 50,000 square feet or with 16 or fewer residential accounts) from a requirement to submit data to the commission.
The CPUC can also decide whether compliance with a local benchmarking program satisfies the state requirement.SB 500 also addresses practical implementation: it allows the CPUC to identify who delivers data to the commission, authorizes enforcement tools for compliance, and permits utilities to recover reasonable costs of delivering data through rates (and allows local publicly owned utilities to treat costs as reimbursable from general funds if deemed cost‑effective). The bill permits the commission to treat multiple adjacent buildings under common ownership as a single covered building when they collectively meet the account threshold, and it preserves local governments’ ability to run their own benchmarking programs.
The Five Things You Need to Know
A “covered building” is either (A) any building with no residential utility accounts, or (B) any building with five or more active utility accounts (residential or nonresidential).
Utilities must retain at least the most recent 12 complete months of building energy usage and, upon owner authorization, deliver aggregated monthly usage for a covered building for those 12 months.
For covered buildings with three or more active utility accounts, utilities must provide aggregated usage for the prior 12 months without treating that aggregation as confidential and with an express waiver of liability for owner and utility for downstream disclosures.
Utilities must deliver the requested aggregated data within four weeks; the CPUC will set the public‑disclosure rules and may exempt small buildings (under 50,000 sq ft or 16 or fewer residential accounts) from reporting to the commission.
Utilities may recover reasonable costs of delivering usage data through rates for investor‑owned utilities, while local publicly owned utilities may treat disclosure costs as reimbursable from general funds if classified as cost‑effective demand‑side management.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions: 'benchmark', 'covered building', 'energy', and Portfolio Manager
This section narrows the scope by defining the core terms used throughout the bill. 'Covered building' uses account counts and presence of residential accounts rather than square footage as the primary threshold, and 'energy' is explicitly tied to the fuels tracked by ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager (with CPUC authority to approve alternatives). That keeps the law focused on datasets useful for benchmarking rather than every possible meter or fuel.
Utility recordkeeping requirement
Utilities must retain records of building energy usage for at least the most recent 12 complete calendar months. Practically, this compels utilities to maintain historical meter aggregations for buildings rather than relying on ad hoc extraction from account-level systems, which affects data storage, retention policies, and IT processes.
Obligation to deliver aggregated building usage and aggregation rules
This is the operational core: upon owner request and written or secure electronic authorization, utilities must deliver aggregated building usage to owners or to ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager. For buildings with three or more active accounts, the utility provides aggregated usage for the last 12 months and the aggregation is not subject to confidentiality rules. For smaller covered buildings, the utility needs accountholder consent before delivering the data. The provision sets a four‑week turnaround and requires monthly granularity unless the CPUC says otherwise.
CPUC rulemaking and public disclosure framework
The CPUC must adopt regulations about what data and building characteristics are collected for benchmarking, how benchmarking is publicly disclosed, which buildings are exempt from public release, and an implementation schedule. The CPUC also identifies information protected under the California Public Records Act and Information Practices Act, giving the commission discretion to balance transparency and privacy in rulemaking.
Enforcement backstops and consent paths for non‑covered buildings
The CPUC may use its enforcement authorities to ensure timely and accurate submissions; importantly, building owners are insulated from enforcement penalties if a utility fails to provide required information. For non‑covered buildings or where aggregation thresholds are not met, the CPUC may prescribe how utilities obtain customer permission, including electronic authorization or lease provisions.
Cost recovery rules for utilities and public power
Investor‑owned electrical and gas corporations may recover reasonable costs of delivering usage data through rates approved by the CPUC. Local publicly owned utilities can classify disclosure costs as cost‑effective demand‑side management and reimburse them from general funds. These mechanics determine who ultimately bears the operational cost of data delivery.
Aggregation across multiple buildings and preservation of local programs
The CPUC can treat two or more adjacent or co‑owned buildings with five or more aggregate accounts as a single covered building for rulemaking and data delivery, and utilities must supply aggregated data for such grouped properties on request. The statute also explicitly preserves local authority for cities and counties to create their own benchmarking and disclosure programs, so statewide rules will need to be harmonized with existing or future local ordinances.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Energy across all five countries.
Explore Energy in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Owners and managers of multi‑meter commercial and large residential properties — they gain reliable access to 12 months of monthly aggregated usage needed to benchmark performance and prioritize efficiency upgrades.
- Municipal benchmarking programs and regulators — the bill reduces data friction, enabling cities and the CPUC to assemble consistent datasets for public disclosure and policy evaluation.
- Energy service companies, auditors, and benchmarking platforms (e.g., ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager) — standardized access means more predictable workflows, larger data sets for audits, and clearer markets for retrofit services.
- Tenants and building occupants concerned with energy efficiency — broader benchmarking makes building performance more visible, which can inform leasing and investment decisions when results are published.
Who Bears the Cost
- Investor‑owned electric and gas utilities — they must modify systems, aggregate account data at the building level, process requests within four weeks, and absorb near‑term operational costs (recoverable through rates but requiring CPUC approval).
- Local publicly owned utilities — while they can get reimbursed from general funds if costs qualify, they still must perform the operational work and justify the costs internally.
- Building owners and managers — they must provide authorizations, manage requests to utilities, and potentially reconcile consent from tenants in smaller buildings, creating administrative work and possible tenant relations costs.
- Ratepayers generally — because IOUs can recover reasonable costs in rates, the operational expense of building‑level data delivery will likely be socialized unless CPUC limits recoverable costs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
At heart SB 500 forces a trade‑off between transparency for energy benchmarking (which supports efficiency, public accountability, and market services) and privacy plus operational cost (the potential for tenant re‑identification, administrative burden on utilities and owners, and ratepayer funding of data delivery). Implementation—especially how the CPUC defines aggregation, confidentiality, and recoverable costs—will determine which side of that trade‑off dominates.
SB 500 resolves a core barrier to benchmarking—access to building‑level usage—but pushes difficult choices to implementation. One tension is how the statute treats aggregated data from buildings with three or more accounts as nonconfidential and waives liability for owners and utilities: that facilitates sharing but may leave individual occupants or small businesses uneasy about re‑identification risks in some multi‑tenant configurations.
The CPUC’s rulemaking must define aggregation standards and redaction or suppression rules; without tight definitions, utilities and owners may differ on what ‘aggregated’ means in practice.
A second implementation challenge is data quality and interoperability. The bill ties reporting to ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager inputs and lets the CPUC approve alternatives, but utilities use different meter systems, customer identifiers, and billing cycles.
Converting account‑level meters into accurate building aggregates on a monthly basis within a four‑week window will require IT work, exception processes, and reconciliations. Cost recovery clarifies who pays, but it does not guarantee expedient CPUC approval of rates; utilities may face delays and disputes over what counts as reasonable costs.
Finally, the carveouts for small buildings and the option to treat adjacent parcels as one covered building create boundary issues that will require operational rules—particularly where local benchmarking ordinances have different thresholds.
The statute gives local governments space to run their own programs, which reduces preemption concerns but increases the need for harmonization. If cities require different data elements or disclosure formats, utilities may face multiple parallel requests for the same property and duplication of effort.
The CPUC’s choices on public disclosure, exemptions, and acceptable alternative tools will determine whether SB 500 produces usable statewide datasets or a patchwork of incompatible local results.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.