MINUTES
Energy Planning & Resources Committee
of the Clean Power Alliance of Southern California
Regular Meeting
Wednesday, January 22, 2025, 12:15 p.m.
Meeting videos are available on CPA's YouTube Channel.
http://www.youtube.com/@CPApublicmeetings
Committee Members participated in this meeting from the following locations:
Manhattan Beach City Hall
City Manager Conference Room
1400 Highland Avenue
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
Clean Power Alliance Office
Executive Conference Room
801 S. Grand Ave., Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Alhambra City Hall
Conference Room A
111 S. First Street
Alhambra, CA 91802
City of Oxnard Service Center 1
East Conference Room
214 South C Street
Oxnard, CA 93030
West Hollywood City Hall
3rd Floor Conference Room
8300 Santa Monica Blvd.
West Hollywood, CA 90069
Sierra Madre City Hall
Council Chambers
232 W. Sierra Madre Blvd.
Sierra Madre, CA 91024
Carson City Hall
City Manager’s Conference Room
701 East Carson Street
Carson, CA 90745
County Sanitation District
Conference Room D
1955 Workman Mill Road
Whittier, CA 90601
Arcadia City Hall
Council Chambers Conference Room
240 W. Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91007
CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
Chair Parkhurst called the meeting to order at 12:15 p.m. and Gabriela Monzon, Clerk of the Board, conducted roll call.
ROLL CALL
Alhambra Jeff Maloney Committee Member Remote
Arcadia Michael Cao Committee Member Remote
Carson Reata Kulcsar Committee Member Remote
Manhattan Beach David Lesser Committee Member Remote
Oxnard Kathleen Mallory Committee Member Remote
Sierra Madre Robert Parkhurst Committee Chair Remote
South Pasadena Diana Mahmud Committee Member Remote
West Hollywood Chelsea Byers Committee Member Remote
All votes are unanimous unless otherwise stated.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approve Minutes from the October 30, 2024, Energy Committee Meeting
2. Receive and File October, November, and December 2024 Risk Management Team Reports
Committee Member Mahmud inquired about the accuracy of CPA’s day ahead load forecast, which was found in the monthly Risk Management Team Report.
Staff responded that the variation between the forecast and actual averages is under five percent, which is not a concern to staff.
Motion: Committee Member Mahmud, South Pasadena
Second: Committee Member Lesser, Manhattan Beach
Vote: The consent agenda was approved by a roll call vote
REGULAR AGENDA
3. Oral Update from the Vice President of Power Supply
Lindsay Descagnia, Vice President of Power Supply, presented an update on the Cape Station project, stating that the Board will be reviewing an amendment to CPA’s existing 33 MW contract, allowing CPA to sign a new contract for an additional 18 MW of geothermal capacity. Ms. Descagnia clarified for Committee Member Mahmud that the project will employ new geothermal technology.
4. Receive Presentation on the Clean Energy Innovation Solicitation and Provide Feedback
Ms. Descagnia discussed that the new solicitation process was created because CPA staff frequently receives ideas and proposals for energy production, many of which deserve consideration. Under the formalized Innovation Solicitation, staff would receive and review submissions twice a year and forward recommendations to an Innovation Solicitation Review Team. Submissions would be sorted into one of two tracks.
Track 1 of the process will allow CPA to evaluate proposals and provide selected projects with an agreement to aid in the progression of the early development stage and help attract financing. Track 2 will allow proposals for new business models, contracting structures, or partnerships with CPA, which may be used to inform future RFOs or design customer programs.
Ms. Descagnia described the program’s solicitation structure and evaluation criteria. Track 1 projects are expected to have commercial viability, environmental stewardship, innovation, and community impact, whereas Track 2 submissions are for informational purposes only and will not have formal evaluation criteria. She closed her presentation with the program’s timeline and noted that the Energy Committee will be presented with recommendations in early July 2025.
Committee Member Byers asked how staff would score innovation during evaluation and how the federal government administration may impact the program. Ms. Descagnia responded that this process is for technologies that haven’t been through any regulatory approval process or certified as a resource CPA has been using in its renewable portfolio or as a commercialized storage method. Staff also explained that CPA’s applications are made through State of California agencies, so there would be no impact; however, any federal land project may be affected. In response to Committee Member Lesser’s question about a budget for the cost of processing these submissions, Ms. Descagnia said the program is using staff time, already budgeted for, to review the proposals and then will produce an agreement that requires the developer to return with a firm offer that would be part of CPA’s regular RFO process. She also clarified that the developer could advance their project, especially in terms of funding, if they have an agreement with CPA, giving the project credibility.
Committee Member Mahmud asked about the factors that make a project ineligible for the RFO process, and staff responded they include a lack of an identified site and an active interconnection application. In response to Committee Member Mallory’s questions about community benefits and other factors contributing to the proposal's evaluation score, Ms. Descagnia emphasized that the proposal must not harm the environment and that providing benefits to disadvantaged communities would be a key consideration. As for ranking, a project that offers a non-intermittent renewable energy source like geothermal would be desirable.
Chair Parkhurst asked for more information on what staff expect in Track 2 proposals. Staff responded that CPA’s program involving Haven Energy installing solar and storage on low-income homes is an example of a Track 2 type project that gets pitched to CPA. This solicitation process allows everyone with ideas to present them, not just entities that can get an appointment with staff.
Committee Member Mahmud stated that funding may have the most significant impact from changes in leadership in the federal government, adding that the program will probably save staff time because several proposals will be analyzed at one time. Committee Member Kulcsar proposed that the Energy Committee review some Track 2 proposals. Depending on the nature of the submissions, evaluation criteria like those used in Track 1 could be applied. In addition to expressing enthusiasm for the program, Chair Parkhurst asked that the Committee be given updates on both Track 1 and 2 submissions. Committee Member Lesser stated that he would appreciate any resource that would help him explain how CPA differs from SCE and help his constituents appreciate CPA’s mission. No formal vote was necessary.
COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS
Committee Member Mahmud asked for an update on RFO projects. Staff responded that three projects are under negotiation and two should be completed by March, meeting set procurement targets. Chair Parkhurst expressed gratitude for the support given to CPA by its member agencies, especially as the renewable energy industry enters a challenging time.
ADJOURN
Chair Parkhurst adjourned the meeting at 12:56 p.m.