Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Clean Power And Solar Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SFPUC outlines Clean Power SF enrollment progress, plans protest at CPUC over Diablo Canyon filing and proposes merging GoSolar SF incentives
Summary
Commissioners heard Clean Power SF enrollment and opt‑out metrics, learned staff will file a protest at the California PUC over PG&E's Diablo Canyon proposal, and discussed proposed changes to integrate GoSolar SF incentives with Clean Power SF enrollment and step down solar rebates.
Clean Power SF continues to expand and staff briefed the Commission on both operational metrics and a regulatory strategy tied to PG&E’s Diablo Canyon retirement filing.
Barbara Hill presented program metrics: about 8,000 customer locations on the books with roughly 7,300 currently active and an overall opt‑out rate near 1.9 percent (up slightly from 1.8 percent reported previously). "Our Super Green offering participation is at 3%," she said, noting the program is preparing to enroll approximately 73,000 service locations in the fall batch and that staff had sent about 18,000 notifications so far, yielding 49 opt‑outs and 53 upgrades to Super Green.
Hill also said Clean Power SF would file a protest at the California Public Utilities Commission regarding PG&E’s filing to retire the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Generating Station. "We agree that the plant should be retired, but we disagree that PG&E should be replacing any needed resources for its customers and its CCA customers," she said, adding that the utility is planning to object to PG&E seeking cost recovery now for resources not needed until 2025–2030. Staff framed the protest as asking that replacement‑resource decisions be made through the CPUC’s standard proceeding so CCAs can procure on behalf of their customers.
On program alignment, staff presented proposed GoSolar SF reforms to better integrate rooftop solar incentives with Clean Power SF enrollment: require GoSolar recipients to be SFPUC customers (either Hetch Hetchy or enrolled Clean Power SF customers), simplify incentive payments to a dollars‑per‑kilowatt rate with a predictable annual step down, increase emphasis on low‑income support (including inverter replacement for aging low‑income systems), and enable administratively adding distributed‑energy incentives (storage, vehicle‑to‑grid) pending Board of Supervisors ordinance changes.
Public commenters and stakeholders supported tying GoSolar incentives to Clean Power SF enrollment while urging robust outreach and workforce development. Jason Fried (LAFCO) and solar contractor Janine Cotter emphasized workforce training, careful communication about bill impacts, and the case for battery storage to enhance resilience.
Staff said it will work with the City Attorney to draft ordinance language and return with specifics in October, with a target to implement administrative changes in early 2017.
