Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the PGE SFPUC Power Access topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Supervisors press SFPUC and city agencies over PG&E delays that have cost city projects millions

Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee, San Francisco County · February 14, 2019
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

In a lengthy hearing the SFPUC reported ongoing disputes with PG&E on interconnection and service levels that have delayed 53 city projects and produced millions in additional direct costs; supervisors criticized PG&E’s absence, questioned bankruptcy impacts, and continued the item to the call of the chair.

Supervisor Mark Ronan (chairing the agenda item) opened a hearing to review Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission’s roles in providing power for city projects after prior testimony documented delays and unexpected requirements that increased costs and timelines.

Barbara Hale, SFPUC assistant general manager for power, summarized the commission’s January report covering November 2018–January 2019 and said the report covers 53 city projects (8 new since November), with only two projects energized during that period. Hale said the PUC has compromised on some projects by accepting higher-cost primary service with low-side metering to keep work moving, but that implementation later runs into questions about load and meter configuration. Hale estimated about $8,000,000 in additional direct costs in the reporting period and referred to an $88,000,000 figure reported in November for broader cumulative costs; she also said the city filed a new complaint at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Jan. 29 seeking enforcement of PG&E’s tariff and refunds where appropriate.

Supervisors pressed on whether PG&E’s bankruptcy has made matters worse; Hale said the bankruptcy court authorized PG&E to continue ordinary business, but PG&E has said it will need bankruptcy-court approval to implement compromises that go beyond the six projects agreed before bankruptcy, which limits the PUC’s ability to reach similar compromises at scale. Supervisors gave examples of direct community impacts: Garfield and Balboa pool projects, school temporary-power requests (Lafayette Elementary and Tully Elk), and a restroom at Corona Heights that lost power during construction and remained without service for months.

City departments described project-level effects. Beverly Ng (Recreation and Parks) listed projects delayed or at risk (Margaret Hayward Playground, Garfield Pool, Geneva Car Barn, Golden Gate Tennis Center) and said missing meter removals or delayed energizations threaten bond-funded schedules and community access. Erin Carson (Mayor’s Office of Housing) said two housing projects lacked agreement on the Primary-Plus service and might incur $175,000–$250,000 in extra costs or lose commercial/services space if the city cannot secure similar compromises. Brad Benson and Rod Uwashta described port projects (Mission Rock, Pier 70, 88 Broadway, ferry terminals) that may need intervening facility work and could face redesigns or interim measures if clean-power interconnection delays continue.

Supervisor Ronan and others criticized PG&E for not attending the hearing; Ronan called PG&E’s last-minute absence—citing ongoing litigation at FERC—"a weak excuse" and said the committee will continue to press the company through hearings and regulatory complaints. Chair Mandelmann moved to continue the item to the call of the chair (quarterly reporting to return) and the motion was taken without objection. The committee requested ongoing reporting from SFPUC and the city attorney’s office on FERC filings and any remedies obtained.