(instrumental music)
Holly: Welcome to the California
Public Utilities Commission
on this date, Thursday, February 11th, 2021.
Today's call is being recorded.
If you have any objections, you may disconnect at this time.
President Batjer, you may begin.
-: Thank you, Holly.
Good morning, everyone.
We need to establish a quorum,
so will the agenda clerk please call the roll.
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Present.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Present.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: I'm here.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Here.
So thank you, we have established a quorum.
Welcome to the California Public Utilities Commission.
I am calling this meeting
of February 11th, 2021, public agenda number 34-79 to order.
Due to the Coronavirus pandemic
and the shelter in place order,
we are conducting today's business online
and via remote participation.
The meeting is live stream on the CPUC's website.
You can view the meeting at ww.adminmonitor,
all one word, .com/CA/CPUC.
Closed captioning is available in English and Spanish
through the web's test.
You can click on the green button
to select your language of choice.
Public engagement is critical to the CPUC process.
If you wish to make a public comment
dial into (800) 857-1917
and enter passcode nine-eight-nine-nine-five-zero-one,
and press star one.
You'll be placed into a queue
and the operator will take your name and information.
You'll be called upon to speak
when you get to, when we get
to the public comment period in today's agenda.
If you encountered difficulty calling
into the public telephone line,
please email votingmeetinghelp, all one word,
votingmeetinghelp@cpuc.ca.gov.
We do have a Spanish translator available
for today's meeting.
We will now give instructions on calling
into the Spanish line and making public comments.
We will pause for that interpretation.
(woman speaks in foreign language)
-: Thank you.
Before we commence with public comments
I would like to share the great news that on Tuesday,
Governor Newsome appointed Darcy Hoag
as Commissioner to the CPUC.
Many at the Commission worked with Darcy
when she served as an Administrative Law Judge here
from 2016 through 2019.
Most recently, she served as Chief Counsel
at the California Energy Commission.
Before joining the CPUC,
Darcy represented Native American tribes
throughout the country on matters involving energy,
natural resources, land plains, taxation, water rights,
international human rights, and self-determination matters.
Darcy is a member of the Mohawk and Ottawa native tribes.
Darcy has also served at the CEC as Staff Counsel
and as an Advisor to former CEC Vice Chair, James Boyd.
She is a graduate of the University of California, Davis,
School of Law.
We very much look forward
to Darcy joining the Commission and to working with her
to ensure customers continue to receive clean, safe,
and reliable and affordable utility services.
So welcome Darcy, we're thrilled.
On February 3rd, Governor Newsome issued
a proclamation declaring February
as black history month.
In this, in his proclamation,
he recognized that when Carter G. Woodson first
proposed declaring February black history month,
he sought to rightfully censored the efforts
of American African-Americans in our national narrative.
We continue in that effort today.
We have seen the nationwide movement
to incorporate African-American perspectives
in everything from images and marketing campaigns,
to representation in political institutions.
Our nation is also becoming more aware
of the countless contributions to upholding our democracy.
This year, Governor Newsome honors these contributions
while also highlighting continuous efforts
to disenfranchise black voters.
The state's theme for black history month this year is,
"African-Americans and the Vote," and marks 150 years
since the 15th amendment was ratified,
and a hundred years since the 19th amendment,
finally, giving all African-Americans a right to vote.
We are lucky to have leaders from the departed
John Lewis, who marched from Selma, Alabama to Montgomery,
to advocate for the right to vote in 1965 to Stacy Abrams,
who last month received nationwide recognition
for her gallant effort to register over a million
African-Americans to vote in Georgia.
These and many others have worked tirelessly
to ensure equity in our voting process.
I am pleased to say that California is also extremely lucky
to have an African-American leader
at the helm of our state institution, responsible
for ensuring accessible and transparent elections.
Dr. Shirley Weber was sworn in a week
and a half ago as the first ever African-American
to serve as Secretary of State of the State of California.
This is a, just a glimpse of the countless ways
African-Americans have continued to fight, to
create a state indeed, a nation, that is equitable for all
despite the lack of recognition they deserve.
In celebration, the Commission has scheduled a number
of internal events to highlight African-American heritage
and contributions.
We have already heard
about the history of traditional African food
and how it has been adapted into, into American cuisine.
And we look forward
to hearing from speakers throughout the month.
We'll touch on subjects ranging
from the state's educational system,
the sociological impacts of racism.
I would like to remind us that
while we celebrate this month,
we must continue to acknowledge arms
and continue to do the work every day
to increase equity in our jobs
in our decision-making processes
in every facet of our lives.
I would also like to recognize that Friday,
February 12th, marks the beginning of the lunar new year,
which is often associated with the Chinese New Year
for the spring festival.
2021 is the year of the ox.
I recognize that for many
these celebrations will look a little different
due to the pandemic,
but I do wish you all good health.
In the fight against COVID-19, California
is now administering vaccines
at the community vaccine vaccination sites,
doctor's office, clinics, and some pharmacies.
At this time, healthcare workers and individuals
who are 65 and older near San Francisco, Los Angeles,
or San Diego counties, can book appointments immediately
through https://myturnca.gov/site
or by calling (833) 422-4255.
Online appointment scheduling
for other groups and residents
of other counties will be available soon.
Appointments are also available in Spanish through
the myturn.ca.gov site or by calling (833) 422-4255.
I encourage everyone in those categories
to please get your vaccinations as soon as possible.
Okay, we will now turn to public comment.
If you wish to make a public comment
and you have already dialed in to the public comment
telephone line, please press star one to get
into the public comment too.
DPUC rules do not allow parties
in proceedings to speak about open proceedings.
The public can make comments addressing items
on the consent and regular agenda,
and including items not on today's agenda.
Please note that there will not be public comment
on item 20 and on item 45,
and on all items on the closed session agenda.
You will have two minutes to speak, two minutes.
You'll hear a bell sound when your time is up.
Again, you will hear a bell sound when your time is up.
Please be mindful of other speakers in the queue
and please keep to your allotted time of two minutes.
With that guidance in mind,
I welcome today's speakers.
I will now turn back
to the operator to open the public comment
telephone line, operator?
Operator: Thank you.
The public comment telephone line is now open.
Our first speaker is Barbara Stevins.
You may go ahead.
Barbara: My name is Barbara Stevins,
I'm with the California Alliance for Community Energy,
but today I am speaking to you as a California rate payer.
You must reject additional resource adequacy purchases
by the IOUs today, or be guilty of enabling the theft
of billions of dollars from the people of California.
I have seen CISO's own data.
So you all must have seen that data as well
clearly showing that California's energy supply
was always adequate to meet the needs
during that historic heatwave, were at not to the fact
that power out of state exports were increasing right
as the need in California was ramping up.
There were also suspicious, sequential, unscheduled
shutdowns of different in-state gas-fired power plants
all happening just prior to the predictable increase
in energy demand.
I'm old enough to remember the Enron scandal
and the fierce public anger that resulted.
The data I just cited is getting out to the public
thanks to organizations like the one I work with.
What do you think the people of California are going to
do when they realize this scam that has cost them so much
for unnecessary power that was enabled
by the very people charged with protecting them.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Miss Stevins.
The next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Lucia Marquez.
You may go ahead.
Lucia: Hello, my name is Lucia Marquez and I am speaking
on the IRP and Emergency Reliability Proceeding.
Me and my family have lived in Ventura County all my life
where my sister has actually been
a long time resident in Oxnard.
Growing up in the central coast,
you can clearly see that cities like Ventura
and Santa Barbara are considered the exclusive zones
where the beaches are open to the public,
lots of open space where people can step outside
of their homes and not have to think twice
about air pollution.
But then you have communities like Oxnard who
have systemically become the sacrifice zone of our region.
Oxnard is the home of a HALACO Superfund site,
big ag that uses hundreds of thousands
of pounds of pesticides a year polluting our drinking water,
a shipping port that drowns our air
and diesel exhaust every day,
but also the Ormond Beach Generation Generating Station
and the Mandalay Bay Gas Plant.
Living in Oxnard, we don't have the luxury
of clean air because accommodating polluting industry
has been prioritized over the health of our residents.
There are communities like Oxnard all
over the state who live with the effects of air pollution
and climate change every day, as gas pollutes our air.
For us, extreme heat days are only more
and more common every year,
and we knew, and we know
that hotter climates make gas prints more, pollute more,
it's a toxic cycle.
The IRP cannot allow more than 30 million metric
tons of greenhouse gases.
The consideration of anything higher
only erases the progress of reducing emissions
that we were promised by the state.
We cannot keep setting standards that stop the
progress and innovation.
I can say that we have seen investments in clean
energy being proposed in our community,
but these investments are not tied to displacing
the power plants on our coasts.
So EG communities like Oxnard would get the clean energy
but we're not getting the public health or climate
benefits because gas power plants not being retired.
And with the COVID-19 pandemic, which causes us to
which has caused a severe health crisis in our community,
particularly for those (bell rings)
with respiratory issues.
Now more than ever
we need state regulators to implement programs
that prioritize clean air for our health and our community.
So I'm asking the CPUC to adopt lower greenhouse
gases targets in the IRP proceeding and exclude
any new staff, (bell rings)
(indistinct) Extreme Weather Proceeding.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
The next caller, please, operator.
Operator: And before we go to the next caller,
if we could have a participants slow down
just a little bit to allow for our Spanish interpreters,
that would be much appreciated.
Our next caller is Tiffany Davey.
You may go ahead.
-: Hello, my name is Tiffany Davey,
speaking on the RP proceeding,
and I'm calling from Long Beach, California, which along
with the rest of the LA Basin has some
of the worst air quality in the nation.
Our communities live with the effects of air pollution
and climate change impacts directly attributable
to the continued operations of gas plants.
Now, as we continue to be dealing
with the COVID-19 pandemic in California,
the CPUC needs to take care
of the long-term health and safety of all residents,
which is why I'm asking you to be a leader
in the fight by adopting a lower greenhouse gas target
at or below 38 million metric tons.
Now the IRP proceeding decision on this GHD target
was one of is one that Californians will be left with,
the ramifications are for decades.
But the 38 million metric ton target will put us
on a pathway toward retiring around 2,000 megawatts
of existing gas power, and is a necessary step to
begin an orderly transition off of gas generation.
The current target locks all of California gas plants
in place through 2030, and continues emissions
from many plans in areas with existing air quality problems,
including San Bernardino and San Joaquin counties
as well as severe equity problems, such as in Long Beach.
Now, utility as NCCA has already submitted plans
for both the 46 million metric tons
and 38 million metric tons scenarios,
showing that they are capable
and ready to work towards more ambitious targets.
The CPUC has a responsibility to set California
up to achieve its clean air and climate goals.
Now the CPUC seems to be actively choosing to
not hold our providers to lower emissions targets
and thereby putting the house of Californians at risk.
I urge the understanding of whether this moves
in one direction.
We are confronted with the reality
that we must make decisions
that go against judiciously... (bell rings)
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Dave Schuplush.
You may go ahead.
Dave: Hello, my name is Dave Schuplush and I'm calling
from Long Beach with, as the previous commentors has some
of the worst air quality in the nation.
We're learning from the August blackouts
that some of the coastal gas plants here had
the available capacity they could chose to be afforded.
And that's because their electricity is too expensive
for the California market.
California market is shifting rapidly to renewables
and it's the seasons and proceedings like this
where Californians are actually having their voice heard
and having their priority, their public health priorities,
their long-term financial future priorities.
So many of our priorities, either being expressed
or being the (indistinct) taken away from him.
I call on the CPUC, not only to adopt the stringent
most (indistinct) greenhouse gas production targets.
38 million metric tons is probably too high,
30 would be much better.
The cost difference is fairly negligible more
over for local resilience
for being able to prevent a problem like
we had with the Silverado fires
and longer wildfire season overall.
We need to give Californians the ability to move rapidly
on clean energy investments that they have long
been saying they want... (indistinct)
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next call is Elliot Gonzalez.
You may go ahead.
Elliot: Hello, hello?
-: We can hear you, please go ahead.
Elliot: Okay, great.
I just wanted to check, sorry.
Yeah, I, I wanted you to speak about the same items
that we we heard the previous speakers mention,
the IRP rule, and the emergency reliability rule.
In terms of the IRP rule,
not only should we have a, a, a higher, I'm sorry,
a lower emissions target,
I think it's completely inadequate.
We really need to be taking climate change seriously.
So we should be phasing it out.
We shouldn't be on a path to
to be to 100% renewable energy within five to 10 years.
So we're not anywhere near that with the IRP rule.
And then the so-called emergency reliability,
this is making us more dependent on fossil fuels,
on natural gas, something that causes global warming,
something that is taking us further away from our targets.
So I don't understand why we're talking about this in 2021.
I think that it's inadequate with the climate science.
So, you know, I'm not going to ask adults, you know
to do the right thing, you know, what's going on.
I just wanted to just let you know that people are involved,
people are watching, and we are counting
on you to do what's in the best interest of the future.
And so that means finding, finding a real reliable source,
clean energy from the sun and the wind,
something that is publicly owned rather than continuing to
you know, sacrifice children's lungs in, in
in our planet for the natural gas companies.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Audrey Chinosay,
you may go ahead.
Audrey: Thank you.
My name is Audrey Chinosay
and I live in East East Berkeley.
In South Berkeley, sorry, and am a member
of the East Bay Clean Power Alliance.
And I also speak to item 40.
So this proposed grooming is good
in that it underscores the short-term nature
of the procurement order.
Most expert analysis have concluded
that inadequate supply was not the issue
in 2020, August 2020, far more consequential
where market rules and practices.
So I hope the Commission is prioritizing measures
that improve demand forecasts
and assure the actual deliverability of the energy purchase.
Also, another priority should be ways to organize
and effectively deliver resources on the demand side,
such as the LSE's demand response programs.
We were all pleasantly surprised at the efficacy
of the public response to reload to reduce its load
during those critical days.
Less supportable elements of this proposed ruling
is that it orders procurement solely
from assets owned by the three IOUs
and provides inadequate assurance of fairness
to rate payers.
I hope the Commission recognizes the widely held suspicion
of the IOUs that animates California rate payers.
It's this suspicion that accounts
for their rapid exit from IOU service to create local CCAs.
The price spikes in August resulted
in millions of dollars of unexpected uncalled for
expenditures for the CCA, and for my own CCA alone
the financial burden of that August leak amounted
to almost $10 million.
To conclude, I hope this IOU procurement order
will not take root and add to the ramshackle
expediency-driven nature (indistinct)
(bell rings) infrastructure.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Francis Yang.
Sir, you may go ahead.
Francis: Good morning, my name's Francis,
I'm calling from the Los Angeles area.
I I'll just be really simple.
I just care about climate change and pollution.
And that means during this time we can't be talking
about anymore fossil fuels and in this case, no more gas.
And to read that the IRP has such
an unambiguous greenhouse gas target
we should definitely be shooting
for at least 30 million metric tons of emissions.
And also that there's this thing called the
Extreme Weather Proceeding, which looks
like you just want to procure more gas
because apparently we're not burning enough.
And so to me,
all this means is the CPUC isn't taking seriously
at all this whole California Climate Leader Initiative.
Instead, it's just continuing to adhere to the status quo,
this big utility thinking like, oh my God
we have all these spires, our grids are shutting down.
Matter of fact, utilities are causing a lot of these fires.
Let's just buy more gas and that'll just solve the problem.
And the extreme irony I feel right now
is it's called the Extreme Weather Proceeding.
We should be doing everything to stop extreme weather
not fan the planes
which burn gases pretty literally doing.
And so I'm pretty much calling the same
as they hear a lot of other community members talk
about adopt a lower greenhouse gas targets
for the IRP and just no more gas in
especially in the Extreme Weather Proceeding.
That's all.
Thank you for your time.
I hope you've got it right.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Hello?
Operator: Our next caller is Brett Garrett.
You may go ahead.
-: Brett] Good morning, my name is Brett Garrett
from Santa Cruz.
I'm calling to oppose item 40,
the expedited expedited capacity procurement
for Summer 2021.
I oppose this ruling because it's a blank check
for utilities to get paid
to purchase more fossil fuel energy.
This will harm community choice agencies
and their customers by increasing the PCIA exit fees,
and it harms the climate at harms the environment.
This proposed action really doesn't address
the root causes of last year's blackouts.
Don't take it from me,
take it from experts, such as Loretta Lynch
the former President of CPUC
who is raising serious questions
and concerns regarding the root cause analysis.
One of the biggest causes was excess exports of energy,
huge amounts of energy being exported
when CAILO those knew the demand would be high,
doubled the exports from 2019.
We were producing enough energy
but it was being sent off to other states.
Virtual bidding played a large role when
the virtual bidding was stopped, the exports decreased.
And some of the gas fired power that we already paid
for was actually turned off,
both planned and unplanned outages.
Other nearby states experienced the same extreme weather,
but they didn't have blackouts.
There's a webinar on the Clean Coalition website
that provides a lot of evidence and details.
It's worth watching.
Clean-coalition.org, under events, past events.
The name is, "What Cal ISO
"Didn't Tell You About the August Blackouts,"
great information from Loretta Lynch and other presenters.
It's also on YouTube and I highly recommend watching it.
Anyone that's interested in this issue and especially those
of you that are making the decisions that affect us.
Please watch it.
The name is "What Cal ISO
"Didn't Tell You About the August Blackouts."
So my bottom line, I do not support the investor
on utilities buying more fossil fuel energy.
I agree with, I think every one
of the previous callers, please oppose item 40.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Dr. Jim Stewart,
sir, you may go ahead.
Jim: Hello, welcome, Commissioner Hoag,
we really look forward to your support on many issues,
including facing the climate crisis.
Some of the speakers have been talking about that,
and ensuring equity for all California rate payers
including the millions of customers of CCAs.
All of us callers here
and you're going to make a big mistake on item 40.
You must delay that consideration of that
until you and your staff really understand the real cause
of the blackouts was not lack of power.
You should go to that January 28 video
of the expert analysis as posted
on the Clean Coalition website, under events,
and understand what this previous speakers have said.
They were not short of power, it was a computer glitch,
and once they got that market issue fixed
there weren't any more blackouts, even
though the power demand increased later in the summer.
We fear that you may be thinking that your decision
to purchase more unnecessary power will help Newsome
if there's a recall, but you're wrong.
It's going to hurt him because
of all the power bills are going up.
It's time for you to look at the video
and understand what's going on
before you make a rash decision.
Don't leave California customers dry.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Dr. Stewart.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Eva Torres.
You may go ahead.
Eva: Hello, good morning.
I'm calling today, my name is Eva Torres,
I'm calling as a community member of the inland region
and I'm speaking on the IRP and emergency really, really
really proceeding.
I'm calling in because a lot of my communities
around in the LA region, specifically
one community that I want to talk about,
Colton, deals with extreme air quality issues.
Not only is this community surrounded by three gas plants,
but an enormous amount of freight, warehouses, and trucking.
This community suffers from one
of the worst air qualities in the region, especially
because of all the cumulative impacts that are coming.
For this community and communities like mine
in the inland region, choosing gas is not our choice.
We want clean and reusable energy,
and we need our Commissioners to listen
to the eyes to our cries
and really think about going into 100% clean renewables.
We no longer are at a point where we can afford that.
We can, we just stopped bringing gas into our communities
and I urge you today to adopt
a lower greenhouse gas project.
I know the lowest right now
it's considered is 30 metric tons,
but it all could even go below that,
that would be great.
I also want to make sure
that we exclude any new gas procurement
and the Extreme Weather Proceedings, because some
of the main gases for the August outages having fixed
and gas plants aren't reliable anymore.
We need better alternatives for our community and ourselves.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
-: Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Alexis Centerman,
you may go ahead.
Alexis: Hi, good morning everyone.
My name is Alexa Centerman
and I'm currently a resident of Sacramento.
I'm calling today to speak on the IRP
and Extreme Weather Proceeding
because of so many other people
on the call have already iterated.
Climate change is very clearly here and getting worse
and not only is this really scary in the long-term
for our planet and our species, in the short-term,
so many of our most vulnerable communities are
really bearing the brunt of this and breathing
in toxic air, which leads to higher health risks.
And as we've seen with COVID
this is definitely a life or death situation
at this point for so many people that are exposed to this.
So in other words, if California is actually
trying to be a leader on climate change,
I'm calling to urge the Commission to do everything
in their power to ensure that our state's power is clean,
renewable, healthy, resilient, and reliable.
And that's why I'm asking the CPUC today
to one, adopted greenhouse gas target
and the IRP proceeding that is at, or
below 38 million metric tons, preferably 30 would be ideal.
And then secondly, to exclude any new gas procurement
in the Extreme Weather Proceeding
because as a lot of people have identified
the main causes for the August outages have been fixed the
gas plants that were available
weren't reliable at the time.
And there are definitely better alternatives out
there that can solve for the climate crisis
and start to promote more health
and safety for our communities.
I just wanted to end by saying that
I understand that these problems are complex
and that they're large, and that they're difficult,
but I know that the Commission has the power to
really implement bold, creative solutions that commit
to the safe, the safety and health of our communities
and commit to California's SB 100 goals.
So please, I urge you to exercise your responsibility today.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Gabriella Mendez,
you may go ahead.
Gabriella: Hi, hello, give me one second.
Okay, so I'm Gabriella Mendez, I'm calling
from the (indistinct) region
and I'm mostly here to echo exactly what everyone just said.
Right?
I want to adopt a lower greenhouse gas target
in the IRP proceeding at or below 30 MMT's.
This is because we are in a climate emergency.
Our communities are constantly suffering the burden
of this stuff that's going on
and we really need to hold you guys accountable, right?
Because it's not, it's getting
to a place where it's definitely hiking
up the numbers of people who are passing away, right?
All of these community impacts.
And now COVID, right,
is making it more dangerous for our communities.
I also want to ask that you exclude any new gas procurement
in the Extreme Weather Proceeding
because some of the main reasons
for the August outages have been fixed.
Gas lines weren't reliable and there are better alternative.
We are moving towards a future that is green.
Why not start now?
Right?
And especially when you guys are going
to be saving lives by doing so.
So I really, really hope
that you take my comment into consideration today
and adopt a lower greenhouse gas target and the IRP,
and also look towards other alternatives
that are more reliable and better
for our environment and our people.
Thank you so much.
-: Thank you very much.
Operator, caller... Next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Chuck Roselle,
Sir, you may go ahead.
Chuck: Thank you.
My name is Chuck Roselle, I live in Oakland,
and I'm calling as a rate payer representing myself.
I'm calling to express concern over item 40, a vote
for additional utility power procurement
to address resource adequacy.
The ongoing presence of a significant PCIA should
be sufficient evidence that there's currently
more utility-authorized power than the state needs.
The issue is not more power,
it is appropriately apportioning existing power properly,
approving this procurement will only worsen the situation.
CCA customers are or soon will be the largest class
of power customer in the state
and approval decision item 40 could be viewed
as a cost shift to the state's largest user base.
You should not forget that decisions restricting CCA
financial flexibility also restrict local municipalities.
A bad decision could also be viewed
as part of a recent pattern
of decision-making that is unfavorable to other communities.
This includes abusive, enhanced vegetation,
a PSPS structure that protects utility finances
by creating much greater financial damage to local business,
and diesel micro grids that ignore community preference
for clean energy solutions.
Utilities forget but the CPI use,
but the CPUC should never lose sight
of the fact that the industry owes its existence
to municipally authorized franchise agreements.
I understand it can be difficult to efficiently
reconcile load across compartmentalize
load serving entities.
The solution is not to centralize financial control
and decision-making in the hands of one minority supplier.
Rather there should be a level playing field
for all load serving entities and assurance
that area's supplier has equal access
to the best available load information
to respond to emergencies.
The CPUC could exercise its leadership
by restructuring the centralized procurement process
to create an alternative that equity believe balances
load decisions among all power supply stakeholders.
It's an effort that could be undertaken
in conjunction with the CDC and Tyson.
I would also like to briefly express my support for RevOne
to the proposed decision adopting guiding principles
for development of a successor to the NEM tariff.
I must admit I was taken somewhat aback by the fact
that the joint utility opposition response was authored
by former Commissioner, Carla Peterman.
It seemed inappropriate.
Thank you for listening.
-: Thank you for the call.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Angie Aldarez.
You may go ahead.
Angie: Yes, hello.
Good morning.
My name is Angie Aldarez, I'm a resident here
in the city of Highland in San Bernardino County.
And I live in a community facing impacts
of environment racism every day.
Not only do we deal
with that air quality and extreme weather during the summer,
but we're also a home of the fire season.
So that's why I'm here to encourage the CPUC
to adopt lower greenhouse gas targets
and the IRP proceedings at, or below 38 MMT,
and hopefully way below,
but also please exclude any new gas permits,
Extreme Weather Proceedings, even though some
of the main causes for last year's
August outages have been supposedly fixed,
but let's be real, gas plants were unreliable.
There are better alternatives
we should be investing in to prioritize
the longterm health of communities like mine
where folks fight respiratory issues every day.
I got siblings with asthma,
I even have some breathing issues
I'm trying to pinpoint.
We need clean energy, not gas and other fossil fuels.
Stop with the bandaid.
We need solid drastic solutions.
Our folks are dying, dying.
How many more deaths do we need
for folks to do the right thing and give us a vote?
Let's do the right thing and give folks what they deserve,
clean air to breathe.
I hope you stand alongside community
because enough is enough.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
-: Our next caller is Rose Sanibel.
Your line is open.
And Rose, we are unable to hear you,
Can you check your mute button?
-: And due to no response
if you want to go to the next caller?
Operator: Yes, hopefully the caller can get back in.
Our next caller is Reef Holland, you may go ahead.
Reef: Thank you, Commissioners.
I'm calling from Simi Valley.
We've got to vote no on item 40
and really assess how we got here to begin with.
The holes California's power issue stemmed from the fact
that we use profit earning companies
for power in the first place.
We need municipalize all stout state power providers
start making a (indistinct) transition
to localize renewable energy,
like solar and wind generation so
that communities can have power close by, all year round,
without being a problem.
California has enough sun and wind to power itself,
especially when the sun is hot
in the sky, where the winds blow hard.
That shouldn't be an excuse to shut the power off
or pay for energy procurement.
We've known that the state has inclement weather
and wildfires, that isn't new.
I'm appalled that over my lifetime
as a resident of California, it seems that we're stuck
in the same place that we're being held hostage
by the power companies and the people who monitor them,
instead of simply taking them over as an asset of the state
and finally getting the work done
that we need to clean up our infrastructure.
Make sure we don't have any shutoffs
make sure we don't need to do energy procurement,
and once again, use solar
and wind that we have in abundance.
Just start using it, use it
so that no neighborhood ever has to go down
when the sun shining in the sky, when the wind's blowing,
and there's issues with keeping the power grid up.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Lillia Ullua.
You may go ahead.
Can you check and see if she is muted, operator?
Go ahead, we cannot hear you.
Operator: She is currently in her Spanish conference,
so we should hear some English interpretation shortly.
-: Okay, great, thank you.
Operator: You're welcome.
And I guess our next caller then is Chris Peoples.
Please go ahead.
Chris: Thank you.
My name is Chris Peoples,
I live in Oakland, California,
and I have been a PG and E rate payer for about 45 years.
And I'm calling on item 40,
as many of the folks calling in today are.
I would urge you to delay that decision
until you've had an opportunity to take a look
at the root cause analysis,
and although it's somewhat hidden
in the root cause analysis,
it's absolutely clear that California had plenty
of energy on the two days that they had blackouts.
The energy had been shunted off to other states
that never imposed blackouts
and there were some gas-powered plants
that were shut down for unknown reasons.
This is very reminiscent of what happened with Enron.
Further investigation showed that what happened
with Enron was done absolutely intentionally.
I have no idea whether that was the case here,
but we should not be procuring on long-term contracts,
additional energy, when we have plenty here today
and we had plenty
on the days that Cal ISO requested a blackout.
So I would urge you to delay item 40, please.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Chris Wang,
Sir, you may go ahead.
Christopher: Hi, my name's Christopher Wang
and I'm calling to you as a resident here
in San Juan Bautista, which is a part of San Benito County.
One of the primary mission statements of the CPUC reads
that you're trying to regulate services and utilities,
protects consumer, safeguards the environment,
and the assure Californians access to safe
and reliable utility infrastructure and services.
I'm just calling in support of our current proposed
CASAP project, which charter has proposed.
And our specific one is called River Oaks.
I don't know if there's anything further that I can do
besides supporting the project publicly, but a lot of us
in our community are really hard pressed to access internet
right now because there is a stop, physically.
We are only, we're only able to get satellite internet
out here, which is really tough.
All of us are subject to at least two-year contracts
with all of these providers that are sticky and sneaky
and very unstable that have
very unstable connections essentially.
And we're really wrapped up with these high ETFs and
there's really no guarantee of service from them.
So it's really tough for us to transition
to this work-from-home period.
We've been looking into this since
like March of last year when the initial proposal happened,
but we'd really like to just voice our public opinion
and support for the project to go through.
Our project number or our project impact is
about $829,000 and it would give service
to approximately 45 homes in our area.
Thank you for your time.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Yassy Cavazeda,
you may go ahead.
Yassy: Good morning.
Sorry, give me a moment.
I'm multi-tasking as many of us are during the pandemic.
Hello, my name is Yassy and I'm a resident
of the Inland Empire where we constantly see smog
and air pollution in front of our eyes every day
and feel the effects on our health.
Of course, I'm standing in solidarity with many
of the callers that called today on the integrated
or the IRP and the Emergency Response Program.
I also wanted to just remind this Commission
of the month we're in.
We are in black history month
and I wanted to read a quote from Martin Luther King,
which many of us have probably already heard before.
"If you can't fly, then run.
"If you can't run, then walk.
"If you can't walk then crawl, but whatever you do
"you have to keep moving forward."
Both of these proceedings are setting us
on a course, moving backwards.
We cannot stand idly by as we see your Commission
power moving, moving in a direction
that's going to keep rate payers and communities
toking on dirty air, facing a climate chaos,
and the continuation of a reliance on gas
and outdated technology we no longer can afford.
Simply put, the technology, the policy, and the
accessibility to move towards renewable energy is there.
I am happy to hear about the new Commissioner,
shout out to you being your first day
on this huge decision in front of you.
We need more time and you must reject these two proceedings.
This is simply a business as usual that we
cannot afford anymore.
We have a new Commission that's ready to take bold action
and I'm just here to remind you all to keep that
vibrancy alive and reject these two proposed
decisions in front of you today.
Again, that's the IRP decision and the Emergency
Demand Response Proceeding
that was super last minute and you know, barely
barely had any community input in inside.
So I'm sure of our air quality and of our climate.
And please, please, thank you so much.
-: Thank you.
Operator the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Wendy Avila,
you may go ahead.
Wendy: Hi, my name is Wendy Avila and I'm
from the City of Maywood in Southeast Los Angeles.
And I'm here to talk about the IRP proceedings
and extreme weather, and emergency reliability.
My community lives with the effects
of air pollution and climate change every day
as the gas pollutes our air.
I live within an area that is near so much industry
and puts our health at risk every single day.
And I refuse to accept these forms of pollution.
California is a leader on solving climate change
with legislation to move us away from fossil fuels.
Relying on gas capitol expenses, the extreme
the Extreme Weather Proceedings will continue to
keep our communities in the dark.
Extreme Weather and IRP proceedings
are decisions that California will be stuck for for decades.
We cannot keep setting standards
that stop progress and innovation.
So today I urge you to adopt a lower greenhouse
gas target and the IRP proceedings and exclude
new gas procurement in the Extreme Weather Proceeding
because some of the main causes for the outages in August
like mentioned before, have been fixed.
Gas plants weren't reliable,
and there are better alternatives.
I also urge that greenhouse gas emissions for the IRPs are
at or below 38 million metric tons for greenhouse gas.
And also to please vote no on both proceedings
until they hold, they uphold the state goals
for climate justice.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller caller is Thomas Hopeck,
your line is open.
Tom: Thank you.
My name is Tom Hopeck,
I'm with the Foundation for Resilient Societies.
I am one of the presenters for the Clean Coalition webinar
that several of the callers have already referred to.
I'd like to make a statement on agenda item 40,
expedited capacity procurement for Summer of 2021.
So I have some questions for the Commissioners and I hope
you know the answers to these questions and that you'll
be able to address them during item, agenda item 40.
So first did the Cal ISO business rules and PUC tariffs
enforce financial accountability for generators'
forced outages in August, 2020,
that contributed to blackouts?
Second, what was the total amount of financial penalties
assessed to generators as a result of the blackouts?
Third, will the terms of future California capacity
contracts, including prices for generated power,
be disclosed to the public?
And finally, during declared energy emergencies
will generators who have been paid for capacity
be allowed to export power to other states?
So again, thank you for the consideration
of these questions.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Dr. Patrick Kearns,
you may go ahead.
Patrick: My mute isn't working, can I be heard?
-: Yes, we can hear you fine.
Go ahead.
Now we cannot hear you.
So did you adjust your mute?
Patrick: Yeah, it doesn't work, but now it does.
Madam President Commissioner,
I want to acknowledge the powerful impact
of the president comments on pandemic issues
in which the Commission groups and staff could help
and an early vaccine.
My name is Dr. Patrick Kearns
and my intent is to present comments forming the basis
for South Bay Water utility rate payers assertion
that Commission's culture has been transformed
to an adversarial pseudo judicial process, inhibiting
and engagement of rate payers in the regulatory process
due to systematic bias fording participation
within the judiciary administrative judiciary quagmire.
Did the judiciary gets a little credibility
to rate payers value or irrelevant.
One can look at how the Commission is represented
by ALJ official statements, quote, "In determining
"whether the grant to grant rate payers, party status
"the Commission evaluates whether such participation
"as a party would prejudice other parties.
"No comparable determination is applied
"to utilities participation, prejudicing the rate payers.
"In the subsequent proceeding,
the ALJ issued a PD after the case was submitted.
The PD approved the settlement.
The settlement does not resolve all issues
between the utility and intervene a rate payers,
and the proceeding remains open to address
those contested issues.
The proceeding remains open
without any new evidence or testimony.
The ALJ withdrew the decision and resubmitted a POD.
The POD approved settlement between the utility
and the PAO that resolves all outstanding issues
in the proceeding.
The proceeding is closed.
No explanation or justification was given
or requested on the approval by the Commission.
I recommend considering that the Commission consider inquiry
into processes available to give feedback
on the judiciary's behavior
with public feedback. (bell rings)
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Sarah Hammond,
you may go ahead.
Tarah: Good morning, President Batjer and Commissioners.
My name is Tara Hammond,
I believe that's who being called on,
so I'm going to speak.
I'm a San Diego resident commenting on agenda item 26.
I helped advocate for Community Choice Energy
in San Diego for over nine years.
Well, we are very excited San Diego Community Power
will start serving customers next month,
we are deeply concerned with SDG and E's continued
efforts that will hurt our Community Choice Energy Program
presumably to benefit their shareholders.
Two months ago STG and E filed an expedited application
and requested authority to amortize the recovery
of era under collections over 10 months,
and the CCA party has supported
the 10-month amortization period.
The parties went out of their way to accommodate SDG
and E's need for work and expedited proceeding.
Well, I'm not surprised that two and a half weeks ago
SDG and E discarded the cooperation and pulled the bait
and switch, proposing alternatives 22 months amortization
and its opening brief.
And it's concerting that the Commission claims
that no evidence has been presented
of any significant adverse effects
from the 22-month amortization
since there was not an opportunity
for the parties to investigate the proposal
and prevent present evidence against it.
The CPUC's decisions must be based
on record evidence that parties have had notice
and the opportunity to rebut, which did not occur
with a 22-month amortization period proposal.
In addition to the legal shortcomings
and foul play from SPG and E's action
the proposed decision adopts that your regular
and new proposal, without a word of disapproval
this would set a dangerous precedent.
The Commission's obligation to set just
and reasonable rates does not repair the lack
of substantial evidence supporting
the proposed decision's conclusion.
I ask that you please reject the current proposed decision
and revise it to instead adopt a 10-month
amortization period, which has a basis in the record.
Thank you.
-: Thank you for your call.
Operator, next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Clara Haler.
Woman: Kind of like, but it doesn't like beep for you?
So I'm like, I'm assuming that's me
-: Operator, can you bring on the next caller?
I think we had a misstep there.
-: Hello, operator?
Robert: President Batjer,
our next speaker is Tony Alfaro.
-: Thanks Robert.
Tony: Hello, Hello?
-: Go ahead, go ahead, we can hear you.
Please, please go ahead.
Tony: Sorry, sorry about that.
Good morning.
My name is Tony Alfaro, I live in Escondido, California.
I'm calling today to urge CPUC to number one, keep a Rooftop
solar and battery storage going in California
not slow down the Rooftop, solar net metering.
This is an incentive for all solar users.
It's a win-win for everyone
except for the greedy utility companies.
Keep net metering.
Also, strengthen net metering,
so that millions more Californians can make, store,
and share solar energy.
There is a strength in numbers
and if California does not support solar solutions
the whole effort will fail.
Promoting local solar saves everyone money;
Rich, poor, middle-class, renter, homeowner, schools,
whether they have solar or not, increasing utility bills,
climate change, and power outages affect everyone,
especially middle and lower class income people.
Rooftop Solar and battery storage is already helping middle
and lower income people,
including vendors, schools, farmers, small businesses
in controlling their energy bills, keeping the lights
on, and reducing our reliance on fossil fuels.
Rooftop Solar is also reducing the cost
of maintaining long distance power lines
which saves all taxpayers money.
We should keep strengthening net metering
so it helps millions more Californians get solar
and battery storage.
I also understand that today the utilities are
using their insider connections to derail aspects
of the net metering process that we, that they don't like.
Please resist these efforts by utilities to do so
and continue the proceedings as has been proposed to you.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
-: Thank you for your call.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Gabriel Gosman,
you may go ahead.
Gabriel: Hello, yes, can you hear me?
-: We can hear you fine, please continue.
Gabriel: Yeah, so as many people have already said
on the call, I'm, you know, very much against item 40.
We need to, first of all need
to have lower emissions targets and stop burning gas.
As you know, there's mentioned in the Clean Coalition,
the blackouts are not caused it all by lack of power.
There is both, you know, capacity
within California that was exported, that was shut off,
or it was under maintenance
even though it was pretty obvious that, you know
the peak summer time would be a need for capacity.
So we do not need any more fossil fuel capacity
when it comes to, I think it's item 16,
the emissions higher a P levels are much too high
at 38 for 2030.
That's a percentage reduction, much lower, you know
in terms of decline in emissions
then we've seen in the last decade.
So we can be much more ambitious as we had the technology
except to make the investments, you know
and we have to move forward, you know, and we, and also
as we all know, climate change is upon us
and is going to be catastrophic and we need to
move forward with, you know, renewable solutions
and resilient solutions instead of just relying
on the same transmission system that's causing a lot
of these fires and the same fossil fuel generation
that's causing climate change.
And frankly, as you could see with part of the blackout is
that fossil fuels and heat waves are completely unreliable.
And, and can, we can't even rely
on them for powers more fossil fuels still puts us
at risk for further blackouts.
And then we need to also
so we really need to do in-depth in transmission lines.
(bell rings) Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: The next caller is Carolyn Schofield.
Your line is open.
Carolyn: Good morning, Commissioners.
Thank you for this opportunity to speak.
My name is Carolyn Schofield.
I'm a climate advocate
and utilities rate payer from Chula Vista.
Chula Vista is one of five cities eagerly awaiting
the phase one rollout of San Diego Community Power
just next month.
And speaking in opposition to the proposed decision
for agenda item number 26,
recovery of 2020 era under collections.
I would like to respectfully ask you to reject the 2020
the 22-month amortization that was recently proposed
by SDG and E and revise it to adopt the original request
for a 10-month amortization period.
10 months ago, San Diego Gas and Electric
filed an expedited application to recover
the 2020 era through a 10-month amortization
and San Diego Community Power
and Clean Energy Alliance worked with San Diego Gas
and Electric and supported the 10-month period.
Now, only two and a half weeks ago
SDG and E proposed an alternative 22 months amortization.
The proceedings left the two CCAs
no opportunity to investigate the proposal
or present evidence.
Despite lack of evidence from SDG and E
about how PCI eight charges could impact CCA customers
with the new schedule and lack
of opportunity for CCA to gather evidence and respond,
the proposed decision was accepted.
Electricity rates for over 700,000 accounts are at stake.
We support the decision that was already made, but one based
on clear negotiations at the table, equal opportunities
for both CCA and SDG and E to prepare evidence,
is that accurate data
and create decisions that we can all live with.
Thank you for your consideration.
-: Thank you for your call.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Alma Marquez,
you may go ahead.
Alma: Oh, I'm next, hold on.
Good afternoon.
Good morning, my name is Alma Marquez and I am
I was born and raised in LA and I've worked
in the Inland Valley and I also do some work
in Orange County, long-term resident of Los Angeles.
And I work in the community.
I live in Downey.
California is a leader on solving climate change
with legislation to move us away
from fossil fuels and it's been a leader
and I truly believe that we can make the best decisions
as Commissioners this morning, to really
make a difference in what we're trying to do here
in California and be a leader for the rest of the nation.
That's why I'm asking the CPUC to adopt the lower
greenhouse gas target in that IRP proceeding
at or below 38 MMT, and exclude any new gas
procurement and Extreme Weather Proceedings, because some
of the main causes for the August outages have
been fixed, gas plants weren't reliable,
and there are better alternatives.
As a mother of three children and as an executive director
of an environmental justice organization,
I truly see the differences
in the air quality that I breathe every day.
And I am here because I care
about our generation, future generations to come,
my children, and their children.
And I truly see myself
as an advocate for creating these systemic changes
and I urge you to make the right decisions and
and eliminate of these IRP emissions into the air.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Operator, next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Alejandro Montez,
sir, you may go ahead.
Alejandro: Hi, good evening Commissioners.
My name is Alejandra Montez, I in the Inland Empire
and I'm the co-founder of Insights
Sustainability Southern California
and environmental organization with eight-plus
members in San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino,
Orange, and Los Angeles counties.
I'm here to convey our members' demands
in regards to item 40,
which is essentially that the CPUC adopt 30
million metric ton emissions reduction target.
My own activism started almost 10 years ago
ensuring that sources like San Onofre Nuclear Station,
Atawana Generating Station, and others were retired
and replaced by renewable sources
of energy because having gas fire plants
and gas infrastructure in our communities result
in the disparate healthy health outcomes we see today.
These investor owned utilities have consistently
been sadistic cynical gatekeepers
of thought the fossil fuel paradigm
in California seeking the
for every strategy our communities proposed to
make meaningful action fighting climate change
and aggressively reducing lethal air pollutions,
our community lethal air pollutions our communities face.
The utilities don't give a crap about repairs
and that's why we need your help
in retiring 2,000 megawatts of existing gas power.
Our community members have been dying in droves,
asphyxiated by COVID-19, wildfires,
and horrible air quality from mobile sources
like transportation and non-mobile sources
like gas power plants.
It's really the twilight hours
of reducing emissions to stay under 1.5 Celsius
of global warming and providing tangible relief
for environmental justice communities.
It is absolutely irresponsible to make any reductions less
than 38 million metric tons.
Please reject item 40.
Thank you.
-: Thank you for your call.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Lillia Oluway,
you may go ahead.
Lillia: I appreciate this time.
My name is Lillia Oluway.
I'm here to ask that number one,
I ask that you adopt those type of gas of IRP.
And also also, I want you to adopt the number 38
and/or I want you to do something
about the extreme gas because of what happened.
And a lot of...
Sorry, just getting some clarification.
I live in Inland Empire.
I'm here to ask that you adopt alternative gas
under the booklet of IRP and also also number 38,
MMT, and number six, exclude of extreme, yeah,
because one of the major (indistinct)
in August has not been resolved.
There are better alternative than power plants.
Thank you for your time.
-: Thank you for your call.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Matthew Mosalakis,
your line is open.
Matthew: Good morning Commissioners.
My name is Matthew Mosalakis, Co-Director of Policy
at Climate Action Campaign, a San Diego-based
nonprofit fighting to stop the climate crisis
dialing in to express our disappointment
and concern over agenda item 26.
SDG and E's proposed 22-months amortization.
Two months ago, there was an agreed upon understanding
that SDG and E would amortize the recovery
of bureau under collection over 10 months.
All right.
Which the CCA's party supported.
Now, just two weeks later,
we find ourselves with SDG and E's
surprise alternative proposal
and the CCA parties were given no time to
investigate to counter.
FSDJ's proposed decision is to prove
the CPUC will set a dangerous precedent
by not allowing an opportunity for parties to review.
These, this unfairness by SDG and E
is unfortunately not surprising, however.
San Diegans pay the highest energy bills
in the continental United States, not by accident,
but by design, from working families
and communities of color first and worst.
We recommend the CPC reject the current proposed decision
and revise it to the original 10-month amortization period
which has the basis and the record.
Thank you.
-: Thank you for your call.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Laura Rosenberger Hyder,
you may go ahead.
Laura: I probably say number 40
because I think the real cause of the blackout
was not the lack of power.
You hearing me?
-: Yes, we are, we can hear you.
Laura: You can hear me, all right, that's good.
I think it's the export of power and computer glitches.
I have instead have people volunteer
if they want to have their power shut off
during a time when the power, we don't have enough power
they can volunteer to have the power shut off
and sign up for it in advance,
so she shouldn't have to procure any extra power.
All right, thanks.
-: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Brianna McGuire,
you may go ahead.
Brianna: Hi there folks
and thank you for the opportunity to comment today.
My name is Brianna McGuire
and I'd like to call it item 16 and 40.
I'd like to speak in favor
of the 38 million metric ton greenhouse gas target for 2031.
So ideally that would be even lower and please vote
for any option that allows you to adequately plan
for offer when its transmission needs offer winds
will undoubtedly be a part of our renewable energy future
and we should be planning our infrastructure to
accommodate it.
And also please reject investor
and utility buying more fossil fuel energy
as a part of that UWP.
Thank you so much.
-: Thank you for your call.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: And our next caller is Faraz Rizzy,
you may go ahead.
Faraz: All right, can y'all hear me?
Hello?
-: Yes, we can hear you fine, thank you.
Go ahead.
Faraz: Sorry, just making sure.
Hello. My name is Faraz and I'm speaking
on the IRP and Emergency Reliability Proceeding,
and I'm calling from the Inland Empire,
an area that has some of the dirtiest air
in the country because of emissions from dirty fossil fuels.
These emissions are polluting our lungs
and causing immense long-term health problems
for our community.
Right now we're looking down the barrel of a climate crisis.
We need bold action to mitigate the harmful effects to come.
And this is why I'm calling
on our board to adopt a lower greenhouse gas target
and the IRP proceedings at or
below 38 MMT, and exclude any new gas procurement
in the Extreme Weather Proceeding because some
of the main causes for the August outages have been fixed.
Gas plants are not reliable
and they're way better alternatives,
and we need to invest in renewable energy if we need
if we can see if we want any action on the climate crisis.
Thank you.
-: Thank you for your call.
Operator, the next caller, please.
-: And President Batjer, at this time,
there are no more public comments.
-: Okay, thank you.
With no more callers on the line,
the public comment period is now closed.
Okay, moving on on our agenda.
Let me announce the changes to the agenda today.
These are the following changes.
Item six will be withdrawn or has been withdrawn.
Item 11 will be held
until the Commission meeting on March 4th, 2021.
Item 16 will be taken up today with the regular agenda.
Item 17 will be taken up with the regular agenda today,
and item 42 will be held
until the March 4th, 2021 Commission Meeting.
Okay, we'll now take up the consent items.
Is there a motion?
-: So moved. -: So moved.
-: And a second?
Martha? -: I second.
-: It's been moved and seconded.
Will the agenda clerk please call the roll
on the Consent Agenda?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Yes.
The Consent Agenda items have been passed unanimously.
Thank you.
Commissioner Rechtschaffen as well
as Commissioner Guzman Aceves have some comments.
Commissioner Rechtschaffen,
would you like to make your remarks item five?
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
In item five, we adopted a resolution establishing
a citation program in the event that T-Mobile fails
to comply with the conditions of approval that we imposed
when we approved the T-Mobile/Sprint merger last year.
The conditions include standard of standards
of service for things like speed service, coverage, new jobs
to the state, lifeline enrollment, and much
more I'm sure folks are familiar with those conditions.
That citation program establishes penalties in
the event that T-Mobile fails
to comply that are substantial and that's intentional.
The penalties are designed to act
as a strong deterrent to not meeting the conditions
and in particular, and this is important,
they're designed to send a strong signal
that we expect T-Mobile to comply fully and not
just come close to meeting the requirements of the order.
There there's somethings that can be done easily,
there's others that require more effort to
get the full compliance
and the penalties we've established reflect that
that we expect full compliance.
As required by the decision,
we have hired a monitor to evaluate T-Mobile's compliance
and recommend whether any citations should be issued
by our communications division.
And that's that's Dr. Douglas Thicker,
our Senior Associate Dean
and Professor at the University of Colorado, Denver.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Rechtschaffen,
Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
I wanted to speak to item 14
and to acknowledge concerning letters that we received
from the utilities yesterday regarding the net
metering principles PD, that was just adopted.
The issue about all the applicable cost tests
was actually fully addressed in, in the comments
as we developed the original PD,
and the revisions that were made actually
made no substantive change to that original PD.
Nevertheless, I did want to address their critique
and reassure them that while the total resource
cost test will be considered the primary test,
the decision also requires the use
of a rate payer impact measure test
and as well as the participant cost tests.
We, and just, again, we absolutely need to
know the rate payer impact measure of any
of the proposed tariffs that are going to be analyzed.
It's a critical and foundational component of our analysis.
And just want to clarify that any new sort
of interpretation, otherwise it is simply not true,
and we need to have the RIN test in our analysis.
So thank you, President Batjer
for letting me reiterate our commitment
to utilizing that test as well.
-: Very helpful.
Thank you, Commissioner Guzman Aceves.
We're going to take just a little stretch of the legs
a break here, for 10 minutes before we move on
into the regular agenda items.
A 10-minute break, please.
So please be back at 11:35.
Okay, thank you all.
(instrumental music)
Okay, thank you.
We need to establish a quorum,
will the agenda clerk please call the roll?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Present.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Present.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Present.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Here.
We have established a quorum.
Thank you.
We will now take up the regular agenda items.
We're going to take a few items
out of the regular order today.
So there's, let's see, I'm going to begin
with item 17 and then we will go to item 41.
We will not take a vote on 17 before we go to 41.
When we're finished with item 41, we will vote separately
on each item 17 and then item 41, perfectly clear.
Okay.
With that, item 17 I'm going to turn
to Executive Director Peterson.
Rachel, could you please present this item?
-: Yes, good morning, President Batjer and Commissioners.
Rachel Peterson, Executive Director
of the California Public Utilities Commission.
And I'm very pleased to present draft resolution
M-4849 today.
This resolution directs utilities
serving Californians with electricity, gas, water,
and telecommunications to extend certain customer
productions until June 30th, 2021.
These are protections that CPUC's staff developed
and you first approved
in the first month of the pandemic in 2020,
because even then we could see the severe economic
impact that COVID-19 was already happening,
already having, excuse me.
First slide, please.
Here, we list some of the economic conditions
that California is continuing to experience.
It was only a little over two weeks ago
that the regional stay-at-home order
and overnight curfew were listed lifted across the state.
Over 99% of California remains in the most restricted tier.
California has recovered fewer than half the non-farm jobs
that it lost during the first two months of the pandemic.
That's only scratching the surface broadly
of the economic impacts of the pandemic in California.
And on that basis, we are proposing to deliver additional
protection to utility customers
until June 30th of this year.
Next slide, please.
Here are a few examples of the productions covered
in the resolution.
For electric and gas customers,
one of the most important things we're doing
as a Commission is to suspend disconnections
for nonpayment of bills.
We've also required electric and gas utilities to suspend
removing any customers from the CARE and Thera programs,
which both support low income households.
The resolution also requires utilities to making efforts
through community-based organizations
to inform low-income customers about both enrolling
and staying in the CARE and Thera programs.
We've required and are continuing to require water utilities
to work cooperatively with affected customers
to resolve unpaid bills and minimize disconnections
for non-payment.
I note that Governor Newsome's executive order
and 42-20 does remain in effect, which itself
continues a moratorium for disconnections
for all water utilities, both investor owned and public.
For communications customers,
we have suspended Lifeline Program renewals
and we're requiring carriers to increase outreach
to Californians who are eligible for Lifeline.
In a separate resolution in December,
you approved a moratorium on disconnection
of communications customers for non-payment
that is in effect now.
Finally, we state again in this resolution as we did
in early 2020, that all of these are a floor, not a ceiling
and we encourage and expect utility to develop
and implement additional projects.
Next slide, please
The new piece that we've introduced here
is to require utilities to prepare transition plans.
We want them to proactively help customers get prepared
for what we hope to be more normal conditions
as of June 30th of this year.
The transition plans must show how the utilities
will communicate with customers ahead of, and
during the transition and use metrics so that we
and other stakeholders can assess how well they're doing
in guiding customers through the transition.
We expect them to launch these activities well
before June 30th, and should any federal release
become available there to incorporate that
into their marketing education and outreach strategies.
We will see first to drafts of the transition plans
on February 25th and the Low-Income Oversight Board
will hear presentations of a select number
of those plans at their March 11th meeting.
The final plans will be due via Advice Letter on April 1st
so that implementation can begin.
I want to close by thanking the two people who primarily
wrote this resolution and they did so largely
during the holiday season, Alison Labonte from Energy
Division and April Mulqueen from my office, with assistance
from Bradley Delong at the water division.
I am very proud that this resolution is another way that we
at the CPUC are stepping up and delivering assistance
and protection to Californians in this moment
of extreme economic circumstance.
Thank you.
I'll pass it back to my colleagues
and I'm happy to take any questions.
-: Okay, thank you.
I'll take questions now on 17 and then we will move
as I said earlier to item 41, I will...
Any questions on item 17?
Okay, seeing none.
Commissioner Guzman Aceves, would you like to
introduce item 41?
-: Yes, thank you, President Batjer.
And as a Director Peterson has laid out, working
on a series of items to really prepare customers,
prepare utilities and all of us for this transition off
of the moratorium that has been extended to the end of June.
And certainly I'm hopeful that
that we don't have to further extend
that assuming our COVID environment is continues
on the path of this week.
And so before I, I hand it
over to our Deputy Executive Director
on Energy and Climate, Ed Randolph,
just to lay out, Ed will present, really give us a state
of what the arrears look like for our customers.
And then Amy Misrodian will provide details
on the item itself that we will be voting on
to open a rulemaking at to see what other measures
we can be taking to examine how to address this
accumulated customer debt through COVID-19.
I also want to thank the energy division
for their continuous tracking of the impacts
of the pandemic and most notably
for all the staff, as Dr. Peterson mentioned,
including the staff that's presenting today, Amy Misrobian,
for all the work on preparing us to be able to act.
And as you know, I do also want to encourage you
and we'll come back to this when we vote on this,
but there are many measures that we will be examining
in the rulemaking.
It will require a tremendous amount of collaboration
and creativity, and looking at leveraging hopefully as well
non rate payer funds, including some
of what's happened already with shareholder contributions
and most notably the federal funding that as you know
is currently being deliberated as we speak.
So with that, I'm going to turn
to our Deputy Director, Ed Randolph.
-: Good morning.
A quick sound check, can you hear me okay?
And Robert, there's a slide slide deck for this
if you can bring up, thank you.
Yeah, thank you for the introduction,
Commissioner Guzman Aceves,
and good morning, President Batjer and Commissioners.
My name's Edward Randolph,
I am the Deputy Executive Director
for Energy and Climate Policy at the CPUC.
I'm going to present an update
on the impacts the pandemic has had
on electric and natural gas customers paying their bills.
Since the beginning of the shelter-at-home orders
last March, the CPUC's energy division
has been tracking data on impacts
to electric and gas customers.
Much of the information comes from the utilities
as part of a monthly reports
that we require the utilities to provide to energy division.
The data today is
from the January reports from the utilities.
And before I get into the slides itself, I need to clarify
that we recently realized that utilities are not
reporting some of this data consistently.
I will explain the differences in how they're being reported
as we move through some of the slides
and we will add some clarifying information to these slides
before they're posted publicly on our, on our website.
The slides provide multiple ways
to view the impacts on customers, and I'm sorry,
the slides provide multiple ways
to view the impacts on customers on paying their bills.
While there is a prohibition on disconnections
for non-payments at the moment
the unpaid bills still create challenges
for utility customers, especially
since there is still an expectation
that these bills be paid in full at some point.
Additionally, the uncollected bills
by the utilities are generally passed
on to other rate payers.
So there there's not plans
in place to enable struggling households to
manage their bills and keep them affordable,
other rate payers will ultimately bear some
of that burden as well.
For, and Robert if we can move to the first slide, please.
Working for the slides, I'm gonna focus
on some slides more specifically than others
as I think information is more relevant
to the discussions we're having today on some than others,
but the information will be posted publicly
'cause it has helpful information
and a number of district decisions.
And Robert, can you go ahead and move to the next slide?
This slide deck contains both bar charts and tables
on each of the information.
I'm going to focus on the table,
since I find looking at the actual dollar amounts are
a little more informative than looking at the bar charts.
The first slide we're showing is the ongoing,
the customer arrears since the beginning of 2020,
which largely tracks the amount
of unpaid bills that you know is attributed
to other things other than the pandemic,
but it's largely because
of the pandemic and the economic downturn.
And this chart here provides two pieces of information.
One is the dollar amount that under collection
to the utilities from unpaid bills in total.
The second column or the third column on the table,
the total customers inner arrearage.
I want to pause on that because that is a place
where utilities have been reporting the data differently.
And what we've recently learned is PG
and E has been responding
to the data requests, you know, as, as we've interpreted
and we intended, which is the total number
of customers that have unpaid bills.
Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric
both had been reporting the total number of unpaid bills.
So a customer who didn't pay their bill and March, April,
and May, for example, we have three unpaid bills.
So this is not an apples to apples comparison
on the total number of customers, you know
between the utilities, though, the dollar amount, you know
if the total dollar amount.
Moving to the next slide, please, Robert.
And again, Robert, if you can just move
to the next slide to the table.
And again, you know
this is dollar amount and age of arrearages
and I think this, and then the slides, when we look
at the total customers is a very important indication
of how much families are struggling due to the pandemic
and how many people have bills that are past due, you know
not just one month or two months of struggling,
but for many, many months of struggling out there.
And Robert again, the next table, please.
You know, bar chart on a number of customers.
And again, if you can move to the next table
with the actual numbers, thank you, Robert.
And again, we will need to unwind some
of these numbers is we've understood that, you know,
PG and E at the top, that is actually
the number of customers, where for Edison,
San Diego Gas and Electric, that is the number
of bills that are past due and not the number of customers.
So, you know, some of that may be a customer who's more
than 120 days past due on their March bill
and then on our April bill and May bill, and so forth.
But again, you can see these numbers
as we get into that 120 day in struggling are, you know
are growing to be quite large.
Next slide please, Robert.
And I'm not, I'm not going to draw this one formatted oddly
when we got it moved into the slide deck.
Next slide is the number is from
you know, in the tables, broken out by CARE and non-CARE.
The biggest take home from this one is, is, is actually
a little surprising and it's different between utility
that there is an even, in some utilities, the
the there's a larger number of CARE and fewer customers
would past due amounts
than there are the non-CARE out there
and it switches from utility.
And this actually raises some questions about outreach
and other things that the utilities and the Commission
can be doing, you know, because a non-CARE customer
who is struggling with their bills, we definitely
need to be working with them to make sure, you know
from the very beginning of their struggles
that they are eligible for some rate assistance programs.
Next slide, please, Robert.
And again, next slide again.
And this, because it's amount owed
and not number of customers,
it should be consistent among the utilities.
And I think is another very important data point to
you know, look at how many customers and how much they
you know, they owe know in the various ranges, you know, and
as we see, you know, across the three major utilities
that we're reporting on here, you know, you have well
over a 600,000 households out there that owe more
than a thousand dollars in past due amounts right now.
And I believe that's Robert next slide.
Okay, and so the next part of this presentation, so
I will ask if you want to stop for questions or comments
on the actual data report before we hand it over,
but I will be handing this over to Amy Misrobian
and talk about the draft OYR that you'll be voting on today.
-: I think Commissioner Rechtschaffen has a question.
-: The higher numbers we saw for SoCalGas and SDG and E,
do you think that's largely just an artifact
of the reporting that they're reporting number
of instances of, of non-payment or, or, or
or as opposed to the number of customers,
does that explain pretty much all
of the higher numbers received for those two?
-: I don't think so.
I believe the higher numbers for San Diego Gas
and Electric may very well likely be attributed
to the difference in how they're reporting.
Our understanding is Southern California Gas
Company is reporting the number of customers.
So, you know, you know, looking back at some of those slides
and I should've flagged that, that the numbers
for Southern California Gas Company are, you know
are quite large relative to other utilities.
I don't have a explanation for that.
And we can ask them to provide some further explanations
on why they think their numbers of, you know
customers with a past due amounts are larger
than the other (indistinct).
-: Okay, we'd be interested in getting,
when you follow up and find out,
that would be interesting information to know.
-: As I am sure they are listening now,
so they should be prepared
for a request to provide that information.
-: That's a very helpful question, Cliff.
I was wondering the same.
I think permission to Shiroma has a question.
-: Gee, that was my question
in terms of follow up by the utilities
so that we can have an apples to apples comparison here.
Yep, thank you. -: Okay, good.
Thank you.
Any other questions of, of Ed
before he turns it over to Amy?
Okay, Ed, do you want to?
-: And as I turn it over to Amy, I want to repeat some
of the things that have already been stated for
you know, to, you know
to Amy who will be presenting on this.
And I'm sorry, I'll send them
for getting on Ben's last name,
who've spent a lot of time working
on getting this OIR together
and prepared in fairly quick time and
to the work of Alison Labonte who worked
over Christmas time to help get the, the resolution drafted.
-: All right, thanks.
Go ahead, Amy, I'm sorry, I spoke over you.
-: Okay, thank you everyone.
Good morning, Commissioners.
This is Amy Mitrobian,
I'm a Supervisor in Energy Division.
And so building off the data that I just shared
I'll present on a new order, instituting rulemaking
for consideration, that would consider addressing some
of those arrearages that Ed just shared,
and I'll discuss the purpose, background, issues,
and schedules included in the LIR.
So even though the Commission has taken many steps
to help customers since the beginning of COVID,
as Ed showed, the dollar amount of arrearages
has still significantly increased.
And as we just heard from Executive Director Peterson,
there's a resolution to potentially extend the moratorium
on disconnections through the end of June.
So assuming the moratorium is not extended any further
beyond that, some residential and small business customers
with the arrearages would be at risk of disconnections
for non-payment when the moratorium ends.
The purpose of this proceeding
would be to look at whether there is anything else
the Commission should do to help with these arrearages
and reduce the risk
of customer disconnections for non-payment.
Next slide, please.
I'm sorry, can we go back one slide?
Thank you.
Okay, so to provide some background relevant to the LIR,
the Commission has taken various response measures
since March, 2020, to try to address the impacts of COVID-19
on customers and the energy of workforce from the moratorium
on disconnections for nonpayment to concentrate efforts
to increase enrollment in CARE
and Thera rate discount programs.
And these efforts are detailed in the background section
of the order instituting rulemaking.
The next people on the slide are not things that were
specifically done in response to COVID,
but can offer some important customer systems now
and when the disconnections moratorium is lifted.
So first the Commission requires the four large IOUs,
PG and E, SDG and E, and SoCalGas offer
12-month payment plans to any customer prior
to disconnection for nonpayment.
And customers can request a shorter payment plan
if they wish.
So while customers are not currently getting disconnected,
the payment plans would remain available when
the moratorium is lifted to help manage it.
Second, this month, the four large IOU's
began enrolling eligible CARE and Thera customers
into arrearage management plans.
And these arrearage management plans are newly created
and provide arrearage forgiveness to customers for
past due bills in exchange for on-time payment
of new bills.
Enrolled customers receive forgiveness
for one-12th of their beginning of arrearage balance
for every on-time payment of a new monthly bill,
being their arrearage balance would be forgiven
after a year of on-time payments of these bills.
And again, this program is for eligible CARE
and Thera customers, and was conceived of before COVID
and might not address the broad swath of customers
that are now struggling to pay their utility bills.
And then finally, in November of 2020, the Commission
held a workshop to assess the continued impact
of the pandemic and economic hardships on customers.
We heard data on customer program enrollments
into arrearages and insights from those who work directly
with customers to better understand their experiences.
We also heard from representatives of several other states
about the innovative programs and policies they
had developed to help utility customers in their state.
In Illinois, for example,
the large Illinois utilities offered a one-time credit
of between 75 to $500 per customer
to income eligible customers for their arrearages.
They also agreed to offer residential customers
18-month payment plans, or up to 24-month payment plans
for those customers who verbally expressed to their utility
that they had a financial hardship due to COVID.
So the thinking that we heard, and some of the examples
from this workshop helped to help to inform some thinking
in developing this order instituting rulemaking.
Next slide, please.
Okay, so the OER identified a number of questions
which at a high level are, you know
first is it reasonable to develop an arrearage
relief program to assist customers
with via arrearages that have accumulated
during the COVID period?
And if so, if we should provide this relief,
how should we structure it, and who should be eligible?
How would we fund this relief, including
as Commissioner (indistinct) was mentioning,
any federal funding that might become available?
How should we coordinate any relief
with other customer programs and COVID response measures?
And what are the concerns
and considerations unique to the small
and multi-jurisdictional utilities and their customers?
So the data that Ed had presented
from the four large IOUs doesn't yet include data
from the small and multi-jurisdictional utilities, so
that the preceding would need to assess any concerns
or considerations for these utilities.
And then finally, to note the appendix
to the order instituting rulemaking include
some straw proposals that provide examples
of how the Commission could provide relief
with rough estimates of associated costs.
And these straw proposals are met to provide
illustrative examples of what assistance could look like
in order to spur discussion and the potential development
of modified or alternative proposals for discussion.
Next slide, please.
And the last slide just shows the proposed schedule included
in the order instituting rulemaking.
The next step would be party common
to March 3rd on the proposed issues in the proceeding,
as well as the straw proposals included in the appendix
and any alternative proposals parties wished to
to suggest in the proceeding.
And that's it for my remarks.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Amy.
Well, any questions for Amy?
Okay, I'm not seeing any,
but let me move back to my grid view,
so I could see you all.
I did want to just reiterate
something I mentioned earlier, which is
this is obviously an ambitious timeline so
that we can be responsive in a timely way
to the transition off the moratorium
and really encouraged more so than ever before
for the parties to really collaborate with each other.
I think some of what has been so inspiring
as we've learned through this last week's narrow conference
the type of collaboration that has come
through in other states and mostly the types
of assistance have yield different settlements.
So I hope that the parties take the opportunity
to really rise to the moment and put our customers first
and come up with solutions that are based
on really everyone giving their part and, and coming up
with really a set of creative solutions that we
have perhaps never seen before.
I also want to just briefly acknowledge
that we are working
obviously, President Batjer and Commissioner Shiroma
worked on both the water and energy side here
with our sister agencies as such a critical role.
I want to recognize the role
of the Consumer Service District and Development Department
excuse me, and particular in how helpful they have been
and how helpful they will be in cooperating
with us on the optimization of the federal assistance.
So with that, I asked for your support for this OIR
and for the resolution, and President Batjer,
I'll turn to you and the order.
-: Okay, thank you.
And I want to thank Rachel
and Ed and Amy for those presentations.
I offer my support for the resolution
extending the emergency customer protections
we adopted in April of 2020.
And in this OIR order instituting rulemaking
to consider and develop relief mechanism
for the customers who could not pay their energy bills
during the COVID-19 pandemic.
While adopting the resolution is an important step
in that in terms of protecting consumers
during this critical time of difficulty
and uncertainty, it is very important
that we proactively address the large
and grand energy arrearages that have accrued
during the pandemic.
The rulemaking provides us
with a venue to brainstorm, develop,
and implement measures that will help ensure
that once the moratorium
on customer disconnection and non-payment ends
we can provide relief to the customers.
I'm particularly pleased that the rulemaking has sought
out examples in other jurisdictions,
as Amy just remarked on, to inform our thinking
on potential solutions for the Commissioner to enact.
I'm glad that the rulemaking will consider
both the need for the relief across customer classes
and within customer classes, and potential funding sources
for any relief measures, as it is very important
for us to think about the appropriate size and scope of
of these measures to ensure fairness
and equity to all customers.
Thank you.
And with that, I support both resolutions
on extending the moratorium on the disconnections
and issuing the rulemaking on the arrearage management.
Are there any other comments or questions
from the Commissioners on item 17
and item 41 before we take up a vote?
Yes, Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
I want to express my support for both as well.
On item 17, extending the extension moratorium
and providing other protections.
Big thanks to Allison Labonte and April Mulqueen
for working through the holidays on that.
It, it, it was so essential to put forth
the additional efforts, and I want to thank
the Low-Income Oversight Board
for agreeing to vote at the next quarterly meeting
through providing the utilities
a forum for feedback on their
and to present their customer community education plans,
provide a venue for some feedback, all done in public.
That will be on March 11th at 9:00 AM.
It will be virtual, and there'll be information
about how to log on at LIOB.org.
And at that meeting on March 11th
we will hear from Pacific Gas and Electric,
San Diego Gas and Electric, Southern California Edison,
SoCalGas, and we will also hear from the Civic Corps,
Liberty Utilities, Bear Valley Electric,
Southwest Gas Corporation, Alpine Natural Gas,
West Coast Gas Company,
and Catalina Catalina Island Gas Services.
And for the water utilities, we'll hear
from California Water Service, California American Water,
Golden State Water, Great Oaks Water, Liberty Utilities,
Apple Valley (indistinct) Water and Park Water,
San Jose Water Company, San Gabriel Valley Water,
Suburban water, and then the class B, Bachman Water
Del Oro, East Pasadena Water Company and Elko.
So it'll be a excellent opportunity to hear
from the energy companies and the water companies
on their efforts to provide for education, outreach,
and helping customers get back on track
in paying their bills once the moratorium is lifted.
On the OIR, many thanks to Commissioner Guzman Aceves
for your leadership on this
in terms of really urging us to leave no stone unturned.
I'm looking for opportunities to provide bill relief
to customers in need and a tremendous effort
by Judge Wattsaga, Amy Misrobian, who we just heard from,
Benjamin Menzies for this work.
And in drafting a straw proposal
take start the consideration of these issues,
so we can have further efforts
in place before the moratorium ends.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
I support both.
-: Okie doke.
Yes, Mr. Rechtschaffen?
-: I'm also very supportive of both of these items
for the reasons that all of my colleagues have set forth.
I think we've been very proactive as a Commissioner
protecting our customers across the whole range
of our regulatory reach since the start of the pandemic.
I think it's very, very important
that we're extending those protections now
into the summer because the impacts
of COVID are still being felt very dramatically,
as Director Peterson highlighted
and we need to get started preparing our customers through
what's going to be a very, very difficult transition period.
Those numbers are extraordinarily frightening,
that the extent of the debt owed and the number, the amount
and the extent really, really jarring.
I think the new rulemaking shows that we are
we're continuing to approach this problem
with the same level of urgency that we've had
and we need to tackle head-on this unprecedented challenge
with special consideration
for the most vulnerable in our communities.
I do want to echo the point that Amy made
and Commissioners Guzman Aceves made
that there are many states looking at the same issue.
I know that from our meetings at (indistinct) this week
that the Oregon Public Utilities Commission is voting
on a similar resolution today.
In fact, I don't think we're we're behind anybody.
I, I think we're doing as much as anyone is doing,
but we can also learn from what other jurisdictions
are doing because they are piloting some very
interesting approaches.
Everyone's facing the same set of challenges.
With that, I'll be voting in favor of both of these items.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Rechtschaffen, I wanted to
add my voice to thanking Commissioner Guzman Aceves
for your incredible leadership on this.
Commissioner Shiroma is absolutely right.
You would not, you have made sure
we did not leave anything unturned and
and, and really took into consideration thing,
everything.
I greatly appreciate your devotion and your passion
and your energy towards this,
these really incredibly difficult issues
for our for our fellow Californians.
And I agree with Commissioner Rechtschaffen.
these numbers are pretty horrendous,
that we were just stepped
through by Deputy Executive Director Randolph.
So with that, I will take up of,
we'll take up item 17, item 17,
will the agenda clerk please call the roll?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
-: President Batjer.
-: Yes, item 17 is passed unanimously.
We'll now take up item 41.
Will the agenda clerk please call the roll?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Yes, item 41 is passed unanimously.
Now we're turning to item 16
and that is Commissioner Rechtschaffen to present.
-: Item 16 is a decision
in our Integrated Resource Planning Proceeding.
It builds on the giant shoulders of Commissioner Randolph
who was at the helm of the IRP decision
since it first launch and did such a great job with it.
We heard a lot of interest
from the decision from public comment, or is this morning.
And I want to take a little time to lay
out what the decision does.
The decision will result in the Commission forwarding
to the Independent System Operator, Cal ISO,
so modeling inputs and assumptions
and three different so-called resource portfolios
that will be included by ISO
in its annual transmission planning process.
What this process at the ISO does is analyzes the need
for new transmission investment in California
and what will be estimated costs of those investments be?
The base case that we're delivering is one
that is designed to meet our policy mandates
for reducing greenhouse gas emissions
and also for ensuring reliability.
Just want to note a process important process point
which is that this is actually the first time
that we have adopted these scenarios
and the mapping of individual projects
and/or resources, two transmission station
transmission substations that will be sent to the ISO
by a full vote of the Commission.
In the past, we've done it by a letter signed
by the president or by the lead Commissioner
or on, on, on IRP.
And this is helpful.
It's a more transparent process that provides
the parties to review and provide review
and comments on the process and make sure
that those comments are considered by the full Commission.
I think it's also helpful to provide a little bit
of context about how this part
of the IRP relates to our other greenhouse gas planning
and procurement efforts.
And I do very much appreciate the comments we heard today
from stakeholders throughout the process,
and the depth and intensity of, of those views.
I want to make clear our commitment
to dealing with climate change is absolutely unshakable and
of all the areas that we need to decarbonize in California,
we actually are by far and away doing the best
in the electricity sector.
So right now, as a state, we are at 36% renewable energy.
We're close to 70% carbon free resources
if you include hydro electric power,
behind the meter resources like Rooftop Solar,
and our existing nuclear facility
we are well on our way to meeting SB 100's
renewable portfolio standard goal
which is 60% renewable energy by 2030.
And over the past, roughly 10 years, GHG emissions
from the power sector are declining close to 50%.
Now we know that we'll need to procure a lot more
clean electricity resources to meet our longer term goals,
including the SB 100 goal
of zero carbon electricity by 2045.
And we already ordering very significant amounts
of new resources to be procured
and we're also signaling that even more will be needed.
For example, in 2019,
we ordered the various load serving entities to
procure 3,300 megawatts of clean energy resources.
That's in process now,
those would be procured will be coming online.
Very soon this year, we will be issuing procurement guidance
to replace a number of power plants that are retiring,
gas power plants that are retiring
as well as the 2,280 megawatts
of base load capacity at Diablo Canyon,
which is also retiring.
So that amount translates into significantly
more nameplate capacity of renewable energy and storage.
That additional amount of nameplate capacity is
necessary to provide the same amount
of effective load carrying capacity of the gas plants
of Diablo Canyon, and you bet are going to be retiring.
And the 10-year planning cycle that is reflected
in the base case portfolio that we are sending or we'll send
to the ISO is the result of this decision called for
over 28,000, 28,000 megawatts
of new incremental greenhouse gas free resources
to be procured and come online by 2030.
And that's about 9,000 megawatts of new battery storage,
16,000 megawatts of new in-state renewable resources,
over 1,000 megawatts with out-of-state renewables,
as well as geothermal resources
and long duration storage resources.
It's a lot of new resources.
You heard today, and in our,
in this proceeding, some parties have argued
that we should use a lower 38 million metric
planning target in this decision.
We don't do that,
that decision does not do that, but it does go a long way
to preparing us for that lower target.
For one, all of the transmission included
to meet this 46 million metric ton target that we
adopt will also be needed
for the 38 million metric ton targets.
Additionally, the decision was revised to add three sets
of resources to the base case that we were sending
to the ISO.
First, a one of these is a second location
for out-of-state wind resources instead
of just one location for out of state wind resources.
Secondly, it added approximately 1,400 megawatts of energy
only solar resources in Southern Nevada.
And thirdly, it added 651 megawatts
of in-state geothermal resources.
And by the way, the, the geothermal resource resources
will provide important resource diversity benefits
which many parties have cited.
So with those three additions to the base case,
we believe we're modeling close
to all of the resources that would actually
comprise it 38 million metric tons portfolio.
And just to give you a little bit more context,
this base case goes far beyond what was transmitted
to the ISO just a year ago.
For example, it doubles the generation capacity
that's included in the portfolio.
Last year was last year
it was 9,000 megawatts, in this portfolio
it's 18,000 megawatts, and it adds
over 9,000 megawatts of battery storage capacity.
And this battery storage capacity is mapped
to specific locations on the electric grid
to minimize air pollutants in disadvantaged communities
and in non-attainment areas to the extent possible.
In total, this decision ensures that our grid can be ready
for the procurement and interconnection
of 28,000 megawatts of new resources, new resource capacity.
Just for some sense of scale and perspective,
that's the equivalent of 12 Diablo Canyon nuclear plants.
As the decision explains since we directed all
of the load serving entities to include
in their individual IRPs, to include plans that
meet the 38 million metric tons scenario included,
as well as the 46 million metric tons scenario.
We think there's a benefiting way
to see what resources they propose
and where they'll be located.
So the benefit of that is that
next year's transmission process
can take those specific, more refined locations
into account and therefore be more accurate
and informative in where they map the transmission upgrades.
We can also, and in doing that
we can avoid hitting rate payers
with potentially expensive transmission upgrades
in areas that may ultimately not get developed.
That's the base case.
Just to finish up, we also included very importantly
in the scenario sent to
the ISO two additional policy portfolios
which we referred to as sensitivities.
One of those meets a 38 million metric ton target
by 2030, instead of
the 46 million metric ton target I described.
And one that includes over 8,000 megawatts of offshore wind.
And the offshore wind sensitivity portfolio
will give us very important information that we
can use to determine the transmission costs associated
with these resources in different locations
and can position these offshore wind resources
for greater, for potential, a potential role
in a deeper, longer term de-carbonization scenario
outside of this 10-year planning cycle that we're using.
At bottom, I would have supported a 38 million metric ton
in our last IRP decision.
I believe today's decision regarding the planning
process puts in a very good, puts us in a very
good position to move in that direction going forward.
And I look forward to revisiting our target later this year
once we analyze the 38 million metric ton
procurement plans that have been filed
by each of the load serving entities.
And once we issue a decision
on so-called preferred system plan later this year.
I want to close by thanking the extremely
hard working team that produced this decision.
Judge Julie Fitch, the IRP team in the Energy Division,
Nathan Barson, Molly Circle, Catalina Moslopic,
I'm sorry, Moslanca, who did a great deal of work with this
I should know better than mispronounce her name and sorry
Carolyn, and Jared Ferguson, Neil Raff, and James McGarry
David Withrow with help from Donald Brooks
and his modeling team, and also my advisors
Hughley Schmidt, Sandy Goldberg, and John Simon.
With that I, I asked for your support on this item
-: Mr. Rechtschaffen,
I will be most definitely supporting this proposed decision
and I really want to thank you and your team.
This has been an extraordinary amount
of work, sustained work,
and I do want to add my thanks also to Judge Fitch
and a very dedicated Energy Division IRP team
for not only this decision for your continued work
on the integrated resource planning process.
I, I don't want to go over all
of the numbers that you have gone so well over,
Commissioner Rechtschaffen, and how you have
underscored our continued devotion to climate change
and realizing those the very
very important GHG goals that have been set
by our state.
Multiple Governors, multiple state
legislators have been devoted to these policies,
it's incredibly important.
So as we adopt this decision,
it's important to put in the context
of all of the progress that the Commission has to
drive clean energy development in the state.
In fact, since 2012, there has been a net reduction.
I think this was just mentioned by (indistinct)
nearly a 55 megawatts of gas fire generation.
And California's electricity generation is already
as you had stated, 60% carbon free.
We've accomplished a fair bit, but as my colleagues note
and as some of the callers today have noted,
we do have to go farther.
We know that we will need to procure a lot more
clean energy resources in the short term
and the midterm, much is on the books
as you have identified.
And the decision is just one more step
in needing a critical policy goals of GHG
emission reduction, affordability, and reliability.
And I believe reasonable to continue to examine how
aggressive we can be in our IRP proceedings.
I am glad that Commissioner Rechtschaffen stated we have
taken the step of providing a recommended portfolio
of resources to the California ISO, the California
Independent System Operator by a vote of the Commission.
This is important.
This transparency reflects the importance of these planning
scenarios as we work with as with the ISO in our attempt
to balance utilization of current transmission transmission
systems, with planning, whether in terms
of identifying preferable resource locations
or optimal transmission upgrades, or if you do
that supports the new resources needed to meet our goals.
To that end, I would like to thank the numerous parties
who have continued to engage in the IRP proceedings
and have debated and grappled with the complexities
of the system planning.
And I would repeat as Commissioner Rechtschaffen said,
we are we have set our set the stage
for looking at the NMT targets
and lowering them, and we have set forth on the path.
So in closing, I want to express my thanks once again
to this tremendous effort and I'll turn
to my fellow Commissioners for further comments
and any questions on item 16.
Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Oh, thank you, President Batjer
and thank you, Commissioner Rechtschaffen.
I know very much so that you support a lower goal
to the RFP process and, and it's great to hear,
President Batjer, your support for that moving forward.
I think clearly I'm also in support of that minimum
a 30 million metric ton, 30 million metric tons of target,
if not even lower.
To expedite in getting into our goals
and I want to thank the public and today,
but also in all the comments we received
on this issue, and really the ability to align,
the ability for us to update these goals
and be more ambitious with the ISO's planning process.
Something that's really tricky in terms
of kind of being midterm
with receiving our plans from the LSE's.
I really want to thank you for the revisions that were made.
I think it, it provides me enough conflict to know
that we can update this goal
and how the transmission needed to meet that goal.
I particularly want to call out what you did already
but reiterate the importance of enhanced, excuse me,
of additional geo thermal in the state.
And also I want to acknowledge the inclusion
of the (indistinct) storage project in the analysis as well.
From my perspective,
those projects are particularly critical
for us meeting our more ambitious goals.
So I very much thank you for including explicit commitment
to considering those directions to ISO
and I look forward to supporting this.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Guzman Aceves.
Commissioner Shiroma, please.
-: Yes, thank you.
For all the reasons outlined by everyone else,
I am supporting this decision, you know, it's
it is a complex roadmap.
We have a symbiotic relationship with the California ISO.
I appreciate that this is not only a roadmap,
but also providing for flexibility,
being nimble in face of new opportunities.
And that we know that with any of these efforts
there is a cost to the customers,
and how do we reconcile while keeping on pace?
I appreciate that.
The decision includes important emissions
free factors going forward, and just look forward to working
with everyone on accomplishing everything that's outlined.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Shiroma.
Okay, seeing no other questions on item 16.
Will the agenda clerk please call the roll?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Yes, the vote on item 16 is unanimous.
Now turning to item 40.
I will be introducing item 40,
which is a proposed decision that directs PG
and E, SCE, and NSG and E to contract for capacity.
It can be online for Summer 2021, to serve peak
and net peak demand.
As everyone is very aware,
in August and was mentioned several times this morning
the comment threads, in August of last year
Cal ISO initiated roading rotating outages across the state
due to extreme heat events that affected much
of the Western United States.
Following these events, the CPUC, the CEC,
and Cal ISO completed a root cause analysis
and determined that swift action was needed at each
of our agencies to avoid a recurrence of those outages
were we to experience a similar weather event this summer.
We put, we took swift action
at the Commission to open a rulemaking last fall, thankfully
under the guidance of Commissioner Randolph,
to explore every demand side, supply side opportunity
available that could be online to help balance demand
and supply for this summer.
This proceeding has been moving quickly
because we must move quickly.
There is not a day to waste.
Summer is literally around the corner.
If we are speaking in regulatory frame work timelines,
customers deserve a reliable grid
and they deserve a regulatory body that will be
mobilized to do everything
in its power to ensure that we have one.
I view this as
both my biggest priority and our basic responsibility.
And today's decision represents a concrete result
of our efforts to move quickly
to ensure reliability for our customers this summer,
while we are also revisiting our overall resource
adequacy approach for 2022 and beyond
in our resource adequacy proceeding.
I'd like to go quickly through the main elements
of the proposed decision that I hope will clear
up some of the questions that were asked this morning,
and then reflect on a bit
about the broader effort of what we're doing
in this proceeding and doing at the Commission in general,
to maintain a clean, reliable grid
because this proceeding isn't happening in a vacuum.
This PD authorizes PG and E, SCE, and SDG and E
to contract for incremental capacity
that can be online by Summer 2021,
from the following resources, incremental upgrades
from existing power plants through efficiency upgrades
or revised power purchase agreements,
(indistinct) generation that is at risk of retirement,
incremental energy storage capacity,
and for firm, forward energy imports.
The proposed decision also clarifies that
while the utilities may seek contracts
with all of these resources, the Commission has a preference
for storage contracts and efficiency upgrades,
and or contract terms that are shorter in duration.
Given the necessity of moving quickly,
it says procurement parameters that must be met
and if met, the utilities can submit the contracts
for the energy division review by next Monday,
February 15th, through a tier one advice letter,
if it's a power purchase agreement,
and a tier two advice letter, if it's utility owned.
Putting this PD in the larger context, as we should
as you just discussed on the previous item,
the TPP proposed decision, California is in the midst
of an energy transition and has aggressive and necessary,
I might add, and attainable goals to decarbonize
our electric system, and the Commission
through its integrated resource planning process
as us on a past significant in, are they significant
and continued growth in the clean energy resources,
as Commissioner Rechtschaffen outlined a moment ago.
While we are decarbonizing the grid,
we're also experiencing the effects
that climate change has on weather patterns and energy use,
requiring we adjust and revisit in real time
some of our assumptions on how to balance supply
and demand given these extreme weather events.
And we're having to act in real time
to ensure we have enough demand side resources
and supply side resources to keep the lights on.
That is what we're doing in this decision
and what and that is what we will
we will also, excuse me, be trying to do
in a subsequent decision that we'll be issuing
in a in this proceeding in March.
So this is one step.
The second step will be in March.
Strategies for both decreasing energy demand
and increase in supply are being pursued in this proceeding.
Well, for practical reasons, we had to issue this PD
which addresses supply side resources first,
the fact that this came first doesn't reflect a preference
for the supply side resources for solving this problem.
It actually is quite the opposite.
The demand side resources are my priority
for getting us most of the way there
for ensuring reliability for next summer.
And those will be the focus of the March decision.
The reality is however,
that we can't solve the summer's problem
with only demand side resources
or only supply side resources.
We need both.
And we need adjustments at the Cal ISO as well.
We are not in a position to get to choose only
our preferred resource in this very moment.
So while I understand the valid concerns
about potential invitations
of authorizing incremental capacity
from our existing generating fleet, I feel strongly
that we need to keep options on the table for this summer
in order to fulfill our commitments to customers.
And I am convinced that because
of the very short timeframe between now and the summer,
any additional capacity that utilities may be
able to identify will be minimal.
Part of our ability to successfully decarbonize our grid
long-term, depends on maintaining its reliability
in the short term, while we identify the correct rules
and resources to get us there.
Well, as I noted, we are only focused
on the Summer of 2021, in this proposed decision.
There are also real realities, concerns
real reality concerns that would remain into 2022.
And we intend to provide additional guidance regarding 2022
in the March decision in this proceeding as well.
A tremendous amount of work has been put
to providing this proposal and comments
for this proceeding on both demand and supply approaches.
And I am grateful for the active participation
of the many parties on this expedited timeframe,
but also like to extend
since my sincere thanks and admiration
to the excellent Administrative Law Judge Brian Stevens
and to the many staff and legal,
and energy division who contributed
to the proposed decision specifically;
Ed Randolph, (indistinct) Scala,
Michelle Tito, Jimmie Gannon,
Simone Brandt, and Linen Powell,
Jason Ortega, Erin Jacob Smith, and Candace Maury.
They have all put in a significant amount
of hours and nights, and weekends and holidays.
And thank you to my Advisor, Anen Vorwasilla,
and my Chief of Staff, Shannon O'Rourke,
who has also put in many long hours.
So thank you all very much.
With that, I request my fellow Commissioners'
support for this item.
I will now open up for any questions or comments
on item 40.
Oh, seeing one.
Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Well, hey, thank you, President Batjer.
I just to reiterate many of what much of what you said
and then response to so much
of the critical public comment today at, and
and to really just agree with much of a public comment
that there are many other aspects that the root
cause analysis found including many of which they outlined
in their comments that we're committed to working
with our sister agency on, particularly at the ISO
in terms of some of their markets for exports and imports
and all of what was mentioned already this morning
that we are committed to resolving
and has been already in part largely resolved.
And also the recognition
that we do need to urge greater enhanced penalty for
as a lack of performance of some of these resources.
So just to say that those things that are outside
of this particular decision are also concurrently
moving forward and, and appreciate the public's recognition
of the importance of dealing with those as well.
But they a unfortunate situation that you've pointed
out so well, President Batjer,
of the need for these resources for for the time being.
Thank you very much.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Guzman Aceves.
Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: I completely agree
with what Commissioner Guzman Aceves just said
and I am what the comment was said.
It's, it's very important to underscore
that this is one piece of the puzzle and that we
are vigorously pursuing all the other action items
that stem from the root cause analysis.
I support the decision
for all the reasons that President Batjer, you outlined.
These are urgently needed steps to ensure we
don't endure roading rotating outages
again this summer, like we did last summer
with all the intended health, safety, economic
and other impacts.
I want to underscore also two things that you said,
President Batjer, the decision expresses a preference
for energy storage resources
as opposed to natural gas facilities,
and the decision also expresses a preference for strong
for short-term contracts in the case of natural gas
as opposed to longer term contracts.
And as President Batjer also indicated, we
we really don't envision long-term gas contracts resulting
from this authorization, except perhaps
in a very narrow unexpected circumstances.
I also appreciate the very large Energy Division
team that worked on this, they did excellent work
in a very short timeframe over the holidays to
make sure we could have a timely ruling.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Commissioner.
Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
To you and Judge Enrizzo,
and the team that you outlined for the hard work
on this is the decision I will be supporting it.
This decision formalizes, your December 28th
signed Commissioner ruling, which got the ball rolling.
I appreciate that last month we heard
an in-depth presentation on the root cause analysis
that outlined the roles that we have,
that our sister agencies have at the Energy Commission,
at the California ISO.
It really highlighted that there are
very finely tuned level of effort that is needed.
It's a complex effort to assure a reliable grid
across California.
We are overlaid by the realities of climate change being
upon us far sooner than many would have predicted.
And with that, that brings new challenges.
I also appreciated that from the presentation last month,
as Commissioner Guzman Aceves outlined,
there are additional tools that we need to provide
to our staff, enforcement tools for assuring
that when commitments are made and monies are exchanged
that those commitments do come through
as we need to be able to rely upon.
And I also appreciate that in this entire effort
as we are hardly three months shy of this next summer,
it's such a short period of time, three months shy,
that in issuing this a proposed decision you've
kept a keen eye that we must continue to make progress
on clean energy mandates to avoid even
harsher climate change in our future.
So I will be supporting this decision.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Shiroma
and I thank all of my Commissioners for your
your very helpful and supportive comments.
With that, will the agenda clerk
please call the roll on item number 40?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Yes, item 40 has passed unanimously.
Turning now to item 43, which is also assigned to me
is a decision adopting resiliency strategies
for wire line providers.
Californians rely on their communication services
to receive alerts from emergency responders
and access vital evacuation websites.
Losing this critical lifeline during these ever
increasing times of emergency is not acceptable.
It is, it is dangerous and distressing for the public
and it cripples the efforts of our emergency
responders to coordinate disaster response and evacuations.
This decision requires wire line providers to
develop comprehensive communications resiliency plans
to ensure necessary planning network investments.
Adopts a 72-hour backup power requirements
for wire line providers to ensure a minimal level
of servicing in tier two and tier three
high fire threat districts during disasters
or power outages.
Direct wire line providers to
provide their coordination improve, excuse me,
improve their coordination with emergency responders,
communicate outages to their customers and the public,
and perform annual emergency preparedness exercises.
This decision was challenging, very challenging.
We took into deep consideration the views of the party.
Ultimately, we determined that public safety
is our top most concern and the redundancy that
the wire line networks provide
in addition to the wireless network
is essential to our state safety.
Our state's critical facilities,
such as hospitals, police stations, fire stations,
and other utilities rely on wire line networks.
Our state's wireless networks rely
on wire line networks for their back haul.
And many communities have limited or no wireless coverage.
We have heard directly from these communities,
Topega, Sleepy Hollow, (indistinct) Dune,
Bonny Dune, and many others
in the course of this proceeding.
These communities depend on wire line networks
to call loved ones, to reach nine-one-one,
and to receive emergency information and evacuation orders.
When these networks go out,
they are left literally with nothing
and therefore, their safety is in great question.
We hope that these requirements
as well as requirements adopted this past July,
the wireless providers, will keep California safer
during future wildfires, disasters, and PSPS events.
We will be watching closely
and we will be prepared to modify these requirements
as needed in the future.
I would like to thank the parties
to this proceeding for their detailed comments.
I would also like to say Kayla and Julian Enzo (indistinct),
Raisa Hernandez from the Communications Division,
Ella Michifit, and Lindsay Brown from Legal Division,
the extremely hardworking
and energetic Administrative Law Judge,
Judge Paul Enrizzo, and my superb
and very hardworking Adviser, Michael Malaney.
And with that, I ask your support of this item
and I will turn to my fellow Commissioners now
for any of their comments or questions.
Okay, sorry.
Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
By the way, I need to make a correction
on that last item, thank you to Judge Steven
and here, thank you to Judge Enrizzo.
There's a common theme in today's regular agenda
of really extensive efforts towards providing
for protections, reliability,
as a seamless source of energy, electricity,
what have you and this one,
is another essential piece going forward.
We hadn't previously adopted a series of customer
protection requirements from wireless communication
service providers last year
and it's imperative we turn our attention
to our wire line providers as well.
These are essential for our consumers participating
in our Lifeline Program, who are dependent on the reliable
phone service in times of emergencies and rely
on this program for communication services.
I'm glad to support the PD that implements backup power
requirements to provide for that level of service
and coverage during disasters and outages,
while also turning an eye to exploring ways for the future
to transition to renewable generation
for these essential backup power resources.
So thank you and I'm glad to support the petition.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Shiroma.
Thanks for the correction of Judge Russo from Judge Stevens.
I didn't want to mention it, but Judge Enrizzo
he has quite a, quite a docket as it is.
(laughs)
-: I was gonna say, Judge Enrizzo is extremely hardworking,
but he can't do that, even he can't do
that many cases all at once.
-: I know.
Cliff, did you want to say something?
-: Yeah, I do.
I want to thank, President Batjer,
I want to thank you for your extremely hard work.
This is a very important
and a very challenging demanding proceeding.
So I I'm, I'm vaguely keen partner with President Batjer
and I saw up close how difficult this is.
And I want to thank you
for coming forth with this decision is really important
but very, very challenging.
I, I want to echo what something you've said
which is we we've seen
and we saw this just a couple of weeks ago
at the PSPS hearings involving Southern California Edison.
We heard very powerfully how customers are impacted
by telecommunication outages during PSPS events.
So it is absolutely vital,
as you said, and as Commissioner Shiroma said,
that we deal with wire line resiliency.
One in every five
nine 11 calls is still made using a wire line device.
As you indicated, wire line customers are often concentrated
in rural areas, hard to reach areas.
They lack access to wireless services.
They're all off the most vulnerable communities
during an emergency.
So that underscores the importance of what we're doing.
I want to reiterate, just quickly, comments I made last
year when we adopted our wireless resiliency decision,
the PD does not require that we move
in the direction of clean up clean energy backup generation,
but I think we should keep the pressure on
to take steps toward doing that.
The clean industry, the clean energy industry
is very vibrant, it's growing fast.
The telecommunications industry is very vibrant
at the forefront of innovation
and I hope and expect that these two industries
will apply their ingenuity to collaborate
and develop strategies to rapidly move us away
from fossil fuel backup generation.
With that I'll be voting in support of this decision.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Rechtschaffen.
Thank you very much for underscoring that important point
about the backup generation and
that we really must move as rapidly
as possible toward clean up, clean energy backup.
I've underscored that with each one
of the telecommunications providers as
as I have spoken to them.
So we really do need to move rapidly in this area.
Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
I just really want to acknowledge this decision,
as well as the wireless wireless decision.
We're not new ideas.
It's been 15 years in the making, of course, the, as of all
of the climate change and the cost catastrophes,
particularly the wildfires, have put immense amount
of greater appreciation of the need, but many
of our previous natural disasters and just other
even just operational incidents that occur have led
to the need and recognition that we need this sort
of backup power in place to guarantee service
for our emergency services and evacuation.
So I think I was just asking staff,
2006 was the legislature told us to work on this,
so this is a long time coming.
I want to thank you for finally getting it
across the finish line and I look forward to supporting it.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Guzman Aceves, and thank you
to all of the Commissioners for your comments and thoughts.
With that, will the agenda clerk please call the roll?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Sorry I was on mute.
Yes, the vote is unanimous on item 43.
Now moving on to item 44, Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Yes, thank you, President Batjer.
Item 44 is an extension order for rulemaking R19
zero-two-zero-one-two that implements the rules
and requirements for Senate Bill 1376,
the TNC Access For All Act.
This act provides broader access
to wheelchair access vehicles and for those in need
of access to transportation network companies.
I'm asking for your support
for an extension of the deadline for completion
from February 21st, 2021, to February 21st, 2022.
Now, the reason for this is we've issued two decisions
on this proceeding providing
for the wheelchair accessibility, first to
launch the program then to provide for a, the cost
of payment and then for how do we implement that?
We just issued a, a track three decision on January 29th,
and the Commission will consider this the proposed decision
at our March 4th voting meeting.
Now thereafter, there is a track four
where we anticipate updating our SCOBY memo to wrap
wrap up a few remaining issues.
And we are keeping an eye to the statute
requiring us to submit a report
by January 1st, 2024 on the compliance
with the statute provisions, the effectiveness
of the programs, the partnerships that we're funded
to provide for this program.
So, and that involves hiring an independent entity as well.
So in order to accomplish all of these things, in
in particularly track four, I'm asking
for an extension to February 21st, 2022.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Commissioner Shiroma.
Are there any questions of question
of Commissioner Shiroma for item 44, or comments?
Okay, seeing none,
will the agenda clerk please call the roll?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Yes, the item 44 is passed unanimous unanimously,
and moving on to item 45.
Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
This is a extension of a complaint case
by Carson Hybrid Energy Storage (indistinct) SoCalGas.
There was a PHC held last November
and I'm hoping them are scoping out issues in December.
So they're moving forward finally, on this complaint case.
And I'm going to ask
for an extension until September of this year.
-: Okay, thank you.
Are there any questions of Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Okay, seeing none.
Will the agenda clerk please call the roll on item 45?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Yes, item 45 is passed unanimously.
Thank you.
And Commissioner Guzman Aceves, item 46 is also yours.
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
This is a Southwest Southwest Gas rate application
to an and done August 3rd.
The parties in the proceeding ask the Commission
to approve a settlement.
The end of December, December 30th,
the parties filed an amendment
to the settlement, nothing major, but they did,
it has required additional time for review
and since the current statutory deadline,
and so later this month, I'm asking for an extension
until April 30th to close out this proceeding.
-: Thank you, are there any comments?
Oh, I'm sorry, were you finished, Martha?
Oh, okay.
Are there any questions or comments on item number 46?
Seeing none, will be agenda clerk please call the roll?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
Clerk: President Batjer?
Yes, with that item 46 is passed unanimously.
Moving on now to another 47, which is my item.
This is an order extending statutory deadline
in the rulemaking, a 14 dash 10 dash zero-zero-three,
regulatory framework for integrated
distributed energy resources.
This proceeding was open to develop
a regulatory framework for demand side resource programs.
This framework is intended to be a unified mechanism
to achieve demand reduction and load shaping
using integrated demand side management resources.
This rulemaking has been undertaken in two phases
with the first phase, focused on a review
of the integrated demand side management issues.
And the second phase focused on the development
of required mechanisms.
In this proceeding, we just adopted a decision
in item 12 of today's Consent Agenda
that includes the implementation of two pilots
framework works for curing distributed energy resources
that avoid or defer utility capital investments.
An extension of the proceeding deadline will accommodate
the implementation of these pilots and related workshops.
This decision extends a statutory deadline
in this proceeding to August 15th of 2021,
to address these matters.
And with that, I request your support.
Are there any questions or comments?
Okay, seeing none.
I ask the agenda clerk, please call the roll?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Aye.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: Yes.
-: President Batjer?
-: Yes, with that, the vote is unanimous.
Thank you all very much.
That completes our regular agenda.
We will now take a lunch break for 45 minutes.
Let's say 1:45, so maybe 40 minutes.
1:45 we'll be back in our saddles.
Okay, thank you all.
(instrumental music)
Good afternoon, we are back in session.
Would the agenda clerk please call the roll,
so we can establish quorum?
Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
-: Present.
Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Here.
Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
-: I'm present.
Clerk: President Batjer?
-: Here, so we have established quorum.
We will move on in the agenda to the management reports.
There is no report for item 48, which is the report
which is discussion on recent consumer protections
and safety activities management report.
So we'll, we'll move to item 49, which is manager
at port on administrative activities
and Executive Director Rachel Peterson, who is here,
will present the fourth quarter employee recognition award.
-: Take it away, Rachel.
-: All right, terrific, thank you so much,
President Batjer and Commissioners.
Good afternoon.
Rachel here again and I'm just gonna dive right in
with the first award for collaboration.
We can go to that first slide please.
This one is actually a tie.
-: This goes to two different teams.
The first one is the Transportation Enforcement Branch Team.
Joe Ilias, Eric Hooks, Steve Esguerra,
Migdalia Martin, Haydee Clarke, John Dang.
This is a team that went above
and beyond to ensure that the CPUC's highest priority
IT project, the Transportation Carrier Portal Project
which will convert our carrier licensing
from paper to computer systems, stayed on schedule.
The team had to turn their deliverables into IT
in a compressed timeframe, right before the 2020 holidays.
They shared their knowledge and provided input
and endorsement to our IT department on a tight timeframe.
Each team member was willing to make time
and accommodate each other
in order to deliver on the assignment.
The second team award for collaboration is
to the IT's Network Infrastructure
and Database Team, Ty Tong, Jovi Deboja,
Christine Nutile, Kale Williams,
Jason Shee, Jason Williams,
Ebrahim Mayandeh, Ryan Cayabyab,
Jennie Lee, Fawn Liu, Nancy Fong, and Rafael Placencia.
This team worked together to move one
of the most critical pieces
of the CPUC's core infrastructure
from the San Francisco server room
to our new location in Rancho Cordova.
This is a story of moving infrastructure
so that we can meet the modern needs of our workforce
working across California.
The server room in our San Francisco office suffered
from insufficient ventilation and air conditioning,
and as we all know, when that room overheats
we experienced breakdowns of some
of our most critical functions.
This team worked in Q4 of last year to prepare
and plan the migration of our servers
to a secured temperature controlled facility
that's managed by the California Department of Technology.
The team's planning and preparation
in 2020, meant that hopefully all
of you were unaware that they migrated the servers
and services seamlessly over
the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday weekend.
Next slide, please.
We have several awards for customer service,
Otis Byrd, the third is in
our transportation licensing branch.
During the pandemic, we do still need people to come
into our offices to pick up and distribute mail
particularly from our passenger transportation carriers.
The ones that will hopefully benefit
from our new portal projects.
These are businesses that are trying to stay afloat
in today's economy and our job is to handle their paperwork
so that they continue to stay in business.
Otis has been coming into the office three times a week
to handle all incoming and outgoing mail for the branch.
He is docketing applications,
he's processing requests from transportation carriers,
coordinating with the California Highway Patrol
on vehicle inspection requests.
His customer service skills to the carriers are exemplary
and Otis also communicates very effectively
with all of his coworkers.
Very well done, Otis.
Gillian Weaver in the Energy Division.
She started at the Commission just a year ago,
but has quickly found a way to meet the diverse needs
of the low-income oversight board members, as well
as Commissioner Shiroma who serves on the board
and her own energy division management.
Gillian arranges the considerable
logistical details around the quarterly board meetings.
She develops the agendas, scopes out board presentations,
and helps Commissioner Shiroma strategize
on the best way for the board to advise the Commission.
As you just heard earlier today, the board is going to hear
about a number of the consumer protection transition plans
in March, and Gillian is a core part
of putting that together.
Socorro Garcia is in the Public Advisor's Office.
She answers the main public line
for the CPUC Los Angeles office.
She has to wear many hats and think
on her feet in that role because once she answers the line
she never knows what to expect.
At all times, Socorro remains courteous,
listens attentively, and quickly responds to callers.
She is on the frontline
for the public in Southern California
on behalf of the CPUC and is receiving this award
as recognition for her excellent customer service.
Kasha Thompson in HR.
Tasha facilities all of our workers' compensation,
employee assistance programs,
and disability leaves for our 1,300 employees.
That's one person facilitating all that
for over 1,000 people.
Kasha ensures that our staff know about forms of leads
they might be eligible for, the end that they
receive their benefits in a timely way.
Supporting employees like this has been extremely important
during the pandemic because we are no different
from everybody else.
Our workforce has experienced the significant pressures
and stresses brought on by COVID-19.
Kasha interacts with employees,
showing empathy and providing advice
about available options, and provides consultation
to managers to help them understand the leave benefits too.
She does all of this with kindness and a smile.
Next award for quality improvement,
we have the Energy Division
Budget Administration and Tariff Team,
Sheela Dawadi, Heyward Daluz, Johnny Tran,
Muhammad Ahmad, Yugg Patel, and Rona Banaga.
This group put a paperless advice letter system
into action, improving age old procedures
as we transitioned away
from paper filing and toward a digital platform.
The transition has led to a vast improvement
across the board for all of the energy division.
And I'm going to tell you this number.
I scarcely believed that myself,
but Energy Division process, 1,426 advice letters
in the year 2020.
1,426.
Each one of those was performed in 75% less time
than when the filings were on paper.
The improvement was clearly immediately essential
during COVID-19 and will continue to be essential
beyond the pandemic.
Awards for building morale.
Can I have the next slide, please?
Cathy Fogel from the ALJ Division.
Judge Fogel helped launch an online version
of the ALJ's peer support group for new judges
right when COVID-19 began to impact us.
She dedicated time to ensure
that the new cohort of judges felt welcomed.
She wrote and performed a personalized ukulele song
to commemorate graduation from the ALJ training bootcamp.
Her welcoming spirit lifted the mood
across several months of lengthy online trainings
and they had all of the new ALJ models
feel part of a strong team.
Antoinette Siguenza in HR.
Antoinette is our New Employee Orientation Lead Trainer.
She greets attendees with a big smile and a warm welcome.
Her enthusiasm is what really shines in these sessions.
I can personally attest to this
because I have presented at a number
of these sessions and Antoinette is unfailingly warm
and patient with me as a presenter
and with everybody who's attending.
She is basically a cheerleader for all aspects
of the CPUC and gets new employees excited
to learn about the Commission.
She's a true asset to the organization
and a great person to have welcoming our new employees.
Core values.
Ja'Nay Jackson from the ALJ Division
Ja'Nay demonstrates the core values every single day.
She is our sole agenda clerk and creates, edits,
and publishes every Commission meeting agenda.
She attends every Commission meeting, both home
and away when we are not under stay-at-home orders,
and she helps publish final decisions.
You hear her voice several times during each voting meeting
as she calls the role.
Ja'Nay and I worked on reducing paper use between her job
and mine long before that became a necessity
during the COVID-19 pandemic.
And I can attest to the fact that she tirelessly
strived to demonstrate integrity, accountability,
and excellence, which are some
of our core values at the CPUC.
Wendy Bacher from HR.
Wendy has also been with the CPUC for less than one year.
She is knowledgeable, hard-working, wise,
and works well with both
with colleagues and the supervisors whom she advises.
She has ideas for HR that are innovative,
they improve quality, and emphasize customer service.
Wendy demonstrates the CPUC's core values
in her work by being accountable, owning her assignments,
and delivering excellent work product.
Her work ethic and efficiency results
in good stewardship of resources while serving the CPUC
with distinction.
Recognizing innovation.
David Miller in Energy Division.
David create a program, created a program in Python
to quickly analyze and organize large filings
from 40 entities that file their integrated resource plans
with the CPUC.
The plans include, as I know very well,
and as you spoke about earlier today,
they include large amounts of data and detail
about the resources that each entity plans to procure,
the greenhouse gas emissions that they
say will be reduced and many other elements.
This is that core technical complex work
behind the scenes that helps us
and you, as decision-makers, analyze how California
will achieve our ambitious greenhouse gas reduction goals
for the energy sector.
David's program organizes the filings, flags
and removes errors, and accurately prepares
automatic automated summary reports
and analysis for the IRP team to use.
This work would take many weeks if we had
to perform it manually
and is significantly more accurate than manual validation
and error checking would be.
Next, our recognition for leadership.
Daniel Washburn, Internal Audits.
Dan has done exceptional work taking
over leadership of the Internal Audits Team
during a moment of transition.
Dan took the reign, worked well
with the team, and assumed various responsibilities
while also taking care of his regular duties.
Because of Dan's guidance and expertise,
his peers have remained grounded during their transition.
As you know, Commissioners,
Dan now has taken a promotion at Covered California
and I really wished him all the best
at that various dental agency
as he continues in state service.
And last recognition is to Jose Pereyra
in our Rail Safety Division.
For the last 20 years, Jose has reviewed and approved all
of Los Angeles County Transportation Authority's
light rail transit at grade crossing applications.
LA Metro is undergoing a significant expansion.
Long Beach, Claremont, LAX,
the San Fernando Valley are
all receiving extensions of the system.
Jose has reviewed engine engineering
documents for all of the at grade crossings of the system.
He is the core communicator between LA Metro and the CPUC.
He has also trained all new hired staff
in the Rail Crossings and Engineering Branch,
which is an essential transfer
of institutional knowledge to new generations of engineers.
His contribution is immense for public safety
and the CPUC's role in ensuring that public safety
for the writers of LA Metro now and in the future.
Thank you very much, Commissioners.
I really am delighted to present those recognitions
once a quarter.
Thank you.
-: Standing ovation for all of our employees.
-: Don't look at my shorts (giggles).
-: Yay.
Standing ovation, yay.
(applause)
Inspiring, inspiring.
Thank you so much, Rachel.
Really the stories are inspiring,
our employees just make you so proud
and they work so hard under normal circumstances,
but under COVID-19 it really is quite extraordinary.
So, and thank you for such a nice presentation.
So, thank you.
-: President Batjer, you got muted for a second.
-: Did Dan know that he was being honored
and that even though he's over at Covered California now?
-: I hope so.
I'm checking in with the team to find out.
The team nominated him, which is kind of another indication
of how much they appreciated his leadership.
I'm asking them.
-: That's wonderful.
Well, oh, everyone's wonderful.
So thank you so much.
Great job.
Okay, we will now move on to the Commissioner's report
and who would like to go first?
-: All right, Shiroma, it's you.
-: Okay, thank you, President Batjer.
Okay, just a handful of things.
I'd like you to announce that the CPUC will hold an all day
on bond hearing on Wednesday, February 24th.
We'll be hearing about rising electric costs
and rate trends over the next decade
and how those trends may impact our ability
to meet our climate goals
while maintaining affordable service.
We will be joined on the dance
by the California Energy Commission,
the California Independent System Operator,
and the chairs of our Legislative Oversight Committee.
(indistinct) Russell and Emily Van Der Holden.
To help guide this discussion,
the Energy Division is planning to issue a white paper prior
to the on bonk, that presents detailed analyses
of historical and forecasted costs and rates trends.
And En Banc, a series
of three expert panels made of both researchers, utilities,
and the environmental justice community,
and consumer advocates will help us explore
the issues raised by the paper.
So members of the public are invited to join
in this critical dialogue details on the En Banc
can be found at our website on the data calendar
and the white paper will be posted
once we once the inner division issues get it.
And I also wanted to share that I had previously announced
that Cheryl Wynn and Christine
Christina Leitan were temporary advisors in my office,
and I'm pleased to announce
that they are now official two-year rotational advisors.
Cheryl has been on a, on that short term loan
from the Energy Division since December working
on energy and water matters.
In the Energy Division, Cheryl led the energy efficiency
third party program.
So it's vocation process as a senior regulatory analyst
and prior to joining the CPUC in 2018, Cheryl
managed utility energy efficiency was district portfolio,
which involved coordinating across market sectors,
demand response, distributed generation,
and low-income programs all towards implementing strategies
and marketing campaigns to lower greenhouse gas footprint.
Our Cheryl holds Bachelor of Arts Degree
in Business Administration from the University
of Laverne and a master's Master's Degree
in Business Administration from Pepperdine University.
So welcome Cheryl.
Christina has been with my group since November.
We're not only working on energy,
but also telecommunication matters.
And she joined the CPUC's Energy Division
also in 2018 where she's been working
as a senior analyst on natural gas policy and reliability.
She led the Aliso Canyon
and long-term gas planning proceedings.
In addition to other projects
analyzing electric and gas system markets in the liability.
And prior to joining the CPUC, Christina also worked
in the electric utility industry in a variety
of roles, including on renewable energy procurement
and distribution and transmission infrastructure.
And Christina holds a Master's Degree
in Economics from Cal Poly, Pomona,
and the Bachelor's Degree in Political Science
from University of California at Santa Barbara.
And then I also have a new advisor joining, again,
as a as a two-year rotational advisor, Pwewah Lee.
Pwewah Lee is coming to us from
the Public Advocate's Office.
And she has been serving
as a Senior Regulatory Analyst in the advocate's office.
She's worked on energy safety policy
in regards to utilities
to energization and risk modeling practices.
Pwewah also previously served as a Utilities Engineer
in the CPUC's Water Division.
Before joining the CPUC, Pwewah worked
in the private sector at an energy company
as a research engineer, applying data analytics,
(indistinct) for energy production.
Pwewah holds a Bachelor's and Master's Degrees
in Civil and Environmental Engineering,
respectively, from the University of California,
Berkeley and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
So we welcome Pwewah and she'll be joining us next week.
And then finally, I want to thank Mary Claire Brown
for her two years of service in my office.
Mary Claire, commonly nickname MC.
MC will be joining a new Commissioner Darcy Hoag's office
as an Interim Advisor.
MC joined my team back in early 2019,
serving first as an Interim Advisor
and then joining long term.
Although the two years ago, it goes by very quickly.
And she has been my Lead Advisor on the Multi Utility
California Alternative Rates for Energy Care and
ISA Savings Assistance, ISA,
proceeding the rate design proceeding is
for San Diego Gas and Electric, Civic Gas and Electric,
and Southern California Edison,
and our liaison to the low-income oversight board.
And MC has a Master of Public Policy Degree
from UC Berkeley, Bachelor of Arts in Mathematics
from Middlebury College.
She has advised me on many other energy matters,
including the energization, biomethane, wildfire mitigation,
and most recently has been key
on the CPUC's COVID-19 response efforts.
Now, before the pandemic, we were able to travel
across the state to low-income oversight board meetings
and learn about energy safety and mobile home parks,
utility emergency operation centers,
and Mary Claire has had the
I'll say she had the guts to test
out the methane capture tarps
by standing on top of an active dairy digester.
She has also generously shared her outstanding
cookie decoration skills to represent our office
and the friendly Commissioner office holiday cookie contest
which hopefully we will be able to do next holiday season.
Anyways, best of luck to Mary Claire.
Thank you so much for all
of your work for my office and advising me
on numerous decisions and you will be a great addition
to Commissioner Hoag's new team.
Thank you.
Back to you, President Batjer.
-: That's a great lineup, thank you.
And Commissioner Rechtschaffer,
I think you'd like to go next?
-: Well, I'm sorry that Commissioner Shiroma brought
up the cookie contest, 'cause I'm still smarting over the
the fact that the results were fixed because I spoke
with some of my advisor's cookies deserved first place,
but we won't go to that, we'll take that off.
-: You don't know much about Greg.
It's only been a year.
-: Oh no, it's only been a year.
I'm not thinking about it all the time.
But I did like MC's cookies, so there you go.
I wanted to talk about two things.
First, I want to thank the, all the people who came
to our two-day workshop last week
on our Environmental and Social Justice Action Plan.
We had over 250 participants
with representing dozens of organizations came to both days.
I really want to extend my thanks to Monica Palmieri,
Kathleen Yip, Katherine Yip, sorry, Nicole Cropper
who did a tremendous job organizing the program.
I think it would show
that we've made a lot of progress integrating environmental
and justice considerations into our (indistinct),
but we can do more.
The plan was envisioned
as a living document to be updated every couple of years
and that was what that exercise was about.
I think overall, it was an excellent workshop.
We had a lot of food for thought for us
to consider as we move forward.
I have a staffing update as well.
I want to introduce
and welcome Joanna Penez Green to my office.
Joanna joined the PUC in 2018.
She's worked in both the Energy
and Communications Divisions.
Most recently, most recently she was the staff lead
on the expansion of broadband and the Lifeline Program.
Before coming to the PUC,
Joanna worked in the nonprofit sector
working on national and local sustainability initiatives
on housing, renewable energy, energy efficiency, and water.
So I'm delighted to have Joanna in my office.
She'll be advising me on communications, water,
and a little bit of everything else.
Thank you.
-: That's terrific.
Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
-: Thank you, President Batjer.
I'm also I'm going to be announcing
a new rotational Advisor, Carry Fiesher.
Many of you probably know her
since she's worked here at the Commission
since 2017, and she will hopefully be working
on many of the same issues,
especially the PCIA rulemaking among many others.
She's had a lot of experience working
on customer-sided, renewable energy programs.
That's where we got to really know our work at the
in the work around the solar consumer protections.
And of course, as I mentioned,
she's done a lot around the Retail Choice Policy.
Prior to coming to the CPUC,
Carrie worked at the Energy Foundation
on clean energy policy and strategic communications
at both the state and national levels.
She has a Master's in City and Regional Planning
and a Bachelor's of Art from the University of Berkeley.
So please help me welcoming her to our team.
And on the other front, on the public side,
next Thursday, the 18th,
I know President Batjer, you and Commissioner Rechtschaffen
will be able to join the EPIC Policy Innovation Forum.
And this is obviously EPIC being
our research and development program,
and want to invite the public to join us for this forum.
It's going to be really an opportunity to learn
about everything that's been happening to kind
of get us all coalesced around priorities, as well
as to hear once again from the public, and really the goal
of informing rulemaking as we move forward
and try to set some real programmatic focus
to our work and to the work of our administering entities
which the CEC is the primary.
So that's next to Thursday, the 18th
and hopefully folks can take the time to participate.
Thank you.
-: Thank you as well, Commissioner Guzman Aceves,
I'd like to, as Cliff did,
I'd like to recognize the tremendous efforts
of the staff who helped us host the two-day workshop
and update of the Environmental and
Social Justice Action Plan.
It was an awful lot of work
and I really thoroughly thank you all.
Over the course of the two days we had
over 400 participants from the Commission staff utilities
and community-based organizations.
We heard quite a few discussions
on how to improve, as Cliff mentioned, the ESJ and we
we also the ESJ deputation and workforce development
data standardization, transparency
and our intervener compensation programs
are all we're all top of mind.
It was very helpful
for me to hear some of those prescriptions.
I wasn't able to attend every minute of the, of it,
but I really, it was very helpful to particularly
hear a lot of the concerns
from the disability community and disability advocates
about the specific needs of that diverse community,
including work that needs to be done on direct engagement.
If you, by the way, for those who are listening
if you did not have the opportunity to do so,
we still welcome feedback
on the ideas to update the ESJ plan,
and you can email us ESJactionplan, one word,
@cpuc.ca.gov, ESJactionplan, one word,
to submit written comments.
We will take all the feedback,
see how to incorporate it in our plan, and present an update
to the public review and comment in the coming months.
So I'd really like to thank the ESJ core team
members who organize the event.
The effort, as Cliff had mentioned,
as well as the staff and community partners who
helped facilitate the discussions we had over the two days.
So on Tuesday, January 26, my fellow Commissioners
and I held a public meeting together
with our sister agencies, Cal OES
and CAL FIRE to hear from the FCE
about concerns we had with their overall execution
of their public safety power shutoffs last year, in 2020.
We had a robust participation from customers
and elected officials sharing the stories of the impacts
of the shutoffs on their safety and wellbeing.
And we pressed Edison to articulate their plan
to correct the deficiencies we observed
with their poor communications,
as well as needed improvements
in their forecasting and executing events,
and identifying and supporting vulnerable customers.
We had over 35 or more people that called in
with some real concerns of stories of impact.
It's quite moving.
Reducing the scope and impact of the PSPS events
to customers has been and will continue
to be a top priority of this Commission.
And we will continue to push the utilities
to continue to reduce the size and scope
and only use PSPS as a measure of last resort.
In that vein, as a next step,
Edison must submit a corrective action plan
to the Commission by tomorrow, February 12th.
Following in that submission safety leadership
at the Commission will be meeting with FCE
on a bi-weekly basis to ensure that they are on track,
stay on track to make the needed adjustments
before this year's fire season begins.
I thank my fellow Commissioners
for their continuing engagement on this.
And thank you very much for your
very active participation in that meeting.
That finishes the Commission reports.
And this is this meeting is the public meeting
is now adjourned.
Thank you all for attending today,
we appreciate it very much.
So we will now go into closed session on legal matters.