Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Stakeholders press CPUC for clear NPA screening, benefit‑cost rules and cost‑recovery for pilots
Summary
Advocates, utilities, local governments and CCAs outlined near‑term recommendations for nonpipeline alternatives: transparent screening metrics, a staged benefit‑cost framework, pilot identification approaches and explicit cost‑recovery rules (regulatory asset treatment, performance incentives).
San Francisco — A multistakeholder panel at the CPUC workshop homed in on how California should operationalize nonpipeline alternatives (NPAs) and SB 12-21 pilots. Presenters from NRDC, Tern, Earthjustice, utilities and community groups proposed concrete steps for test projects and data disclosure.
Tern proposed a four‑step benefit‑cost assessment for NPAs: (0) rapid pre‑screening for short‑term authorized projects; (1) preliminary identification using risk metrics, electric headroom and customer density; (2) portfolio development either via utility offerings or competitive solicitations; and (3) present‑value comparison of the adopted revenue requirement for the pipeline project versus the NPA portfolio.…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
