Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Choice Aggregation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PUC OKs limited Community Choice Aggregation study, asks for a phased evaluation
Summary
The commission approved contracts to support analysis of a Community Choice Aggregation program but required a two-phase approach: Phase 1 limited to defining the program and conducting a market study to test customer participation and economics; Phase 2 (implementation activities) will proceed only if Phase 1 warrants it.
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission on June 24 authorized staff to proceed with consultants to support work on Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) but directed staff to limit near-term tasks to a Phase 1 evaluation focused on program definition and a professional market study.
Barbara Hale, Assistant General Manager for Power, described the proposed statement of work for consultants Local Power and GES and said the vendors would help develop an RFP for aggregator services, advise on program design and conduct outreach. Commissioners pressed staff to divide activities into two phases: an immediate Phase 1 to answer the core business question — 'will enough customers participate at attractive rates to make this program economically viable?' — and a later Phase 2 for implementation tasks such as bond issuance, property acquisition or procurement only when and if Phase 1 supports moving forward.
Commissioner Clark (speaker 7) led the push for a narrowed scope, saying staff should 'refine and define using the RFI and our own staff input what would be the program we would offer to potential customers' and then 'conducting a professional market study to determine if the critical mass necessary to make this a program we adopt and implement...makes sense or not.' Staff agreed to return with a resolution text reflecting the commission’s priorities; the commission passed the item with those phase-1 priorities incorporated.
Public commenters representing Community Choice Energy Alliance and Green Party advocates urged broader flexibility — arguing, for example, that early consideration of property acquisition or other program elements could be necessary to design a viable plan — but commissioners voted to keep the initial consultant work limited to design and market evaluation. Commissioners and staff agreed the evaluation would include targeted outreach to large customers because program economics improve with their participation.
