Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Clean Power Sf topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Francisco staff say Power Choice top-ranked in Clean Power SF RFP; protests, negotiations next
Summary
SFPUC and LAFCO officials said Power Choice received the highest score in a competitive RFP for Clean Power SF services; a five-day protest period runs through Jan. 27, after which the city will seek authorization to begin negotiations and must file an implementation plan with the CPUC under AB 117.
Mike Campbell, director of Clean Power SF, said Friday that an expert panel ranked Power Choice first in the city's request for proposals to run the Clean Power SF community choice aggregation program and that the next steps are a protest window, negotiation and an implementation-plan filing with the California Public Utilities Commission.
"We received five responses on December 29," Campbell said, summarizing the Nov. 5 RFP that asked bidders to cover three task areas: energy procurement and load management; development and construction of renewable generation; and customer account services. He emphasized statutory requirements: "This is a document that's required under the enabling legislation AB 117 that needs to be filed with the CPUC, prior to serving any customers," and said the CPUC has 90 days to review that filing.
Why it matters: the city is seeking a program that delivers a high fraction of renewables to its customers while keeping rates competitive with the incumbent utility. Campbell told the joint meeting of LAFCO and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission that the RFP and scoring emphasized the city's policy goals, including a target for a 51% renewable component by February 2017 and interim procurement and demand-side goals.
Power Choice representatives Sam Onoka and Kent Palmerton told commissioners their proposal covers all three task areas and that the company plans to locate its headquarters in downtown San Francisco. "We intend to meet San Francisco's renewable energy goals," Onoka said, adding Power Choice expects to provide local jobs and outreach to locally certified businesses.
Commissioners pressed the proposer on workforce and subcontractor details. Palmerton and Onoka described an array of subcontractors for scheduling, renewable development and demand response and said many contractual specifics will be defined in negotiations and the eventual contract. Campbell said staff welcomes policy guidance from commissioners to shape negotiable elements and that the negotiation phase will be where local workforce and development commitments can be codified.
A five-day protest period tied to the published ranking remains open and, Campbell said, will expire on January 27. "Once this protest period is closed, we shall seek official authorization from the SFPUC to begin official negotiations with the highest ranked proposer," he said.
Public advocates urged that any negotiated contract require near-term local construction and explicit workforce targets. Eric Brooks of the San Francisco Green Party said advocates "would insist that the actual construction and installation that's laid out in the implementation plan is substantially met in the contract," warning that initial procurement alone should not substitute for building new local renewable capacity.
What happens next: if no sustaining protests block the ranking, SFPUC staff will seek authorization to open negotiations with Power Choice, then complete an implementation plan for filing with the CPUC under AB 117. Negotiations will also address data-transfer service agreements with PG&E and how the city will manage opt-out notices and outreach to customers.
The protest period, subsequent negotiations and the CPUC review are the near-term milestones before any customer enrollment or service launch date is scheduled.
