2075 Woodside Road | Redwood City, CA 94061
(650) 260-0005 | peninsulacleanenergy.com
Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee of the
Peninsula Clean Energy Authority (PCEA)
REVISED AGENDA
Monday, May 9, 2022
10:00 a.m.
Zoom Link: https://pencleanenergy.zoom.us/j/83834724993 Meeting ID: 838-3472-4993 Passcode: 2075 Phone: +1(253)215-8782 NOTE: Please see attached document for additional detailed teleconference instructions.
In accordance with AB 361, the Committee will adopt findings that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees of in-person meetings. Consistent with those findings, this Committee Meeting will be held remotely. PCEA shall make every effort to ensure that its video conferenced meetings are accessible to people with disabilities as required by Governor Newsom’s March 17, 2020 Executive Order N-29-20. Individuals who need special assistance or a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, or who have a disability and wish to request an alternative format for the meeting materials should contact Nelly Wogberg, Board Clerk, at least 2 working days before the meeting at [email protected]. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable PCEA to make best efforts to reasonably accommodate accessibility to this meeting and the materials related to it.
If you wish to speak to the Executive Committee, please use the “Raise Your Hand” function in the Zoom platform or press *6 if you phoned into the meeting. If you have anything that you wish to be distributed to the Executive Committee and included in the official record, please send to [email protected].
CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
PUBLIC COMMENT
This item is reserved for persons wishing to address the Committee on any PCEA-related matters that are not otherwise on this meeting agenda. Public comments on matters listed on the agenda shall be heard at the time the matter is called. Members of the public who wish to address the Committee are customarily limited to two minutes per speaker. The Committee Chair may increase or decrease the time allotted to each speaker.
ACTION TO SET AGENDA AND TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
1. Adopt Findings Pursuant to AB 361 to Continue Fully Teleconferenced Committee Meetings Due to Health Risks Posed by In-Person Meetings
2. Approval of the Minutes for the April 11, 2022 Executive Committee Meeting
REGULAR AGENDA
3. Chair Report (Discussion)
1 4. CEO Report (Discussion)
5. Review of 2021 Citizens Advisory Committee Workplan Deliverables and Role of the Committee (Discussion)
6. Review of Proposed 2022 Citizens Advisory Committee Workplan and Deliverables (Discussion)
7. Review Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Draft Budget (Discussion)
8. Staff Feedback and Discussion of Potential Expansion (Discussion)
9. Review of Updated Peninsula Clean Energy Staff Organization Chart (Discussion)
10. Committee Members’ Reports (Discussion)
ADJOURNMENT
Public records that relate to any item on the open session agenda are available for public inspection. The records are available at the Peninsula Clean Energy offices or on PCEA’s Website at: https://www.peninsulacleanenergy.com. 2 Instructions for Joining a Zoom Meeting via Computer or Phone Best Practices:
• Please mute your microphone when you are not speaking to minimize audio feedback • If possible, utilize headphones or ear buds to minimize audio feedback • If participating via videoconference, audio quality is often better if you use the dial-in option (Option 2 below) rather than your computer audio
Options for Joining
A. Videoconference with Computer Audio – see Option 1 below B. Videoconference with Phone Call Audio– see Option 2 below C. Calling in via Telephone/Landline – see Option 3 below Videoconference Options:
Prior to the meeting, we recommend that you install the Zoom Meetings application on your computer by clicking here https://zoom.us/download.
If you want full capabilities for videoconferencing (audio, video, screensharing) you must download the Zoom application.
Option 1 Videoconference with Computer Audio:
1. From your computer, click on the following link that is also included in the Meeting Calendar Invitation: https://pencleanenergy.zoom.us/j/83834724993.
2. The Zoom application will open on its own or you will be instructed to open Zoom.
3. After the application opens, the pop-up screen below will appear asking you to choose ONE of the audio conference options. Click on the Computer Audio option at the top of the pop-up screen.
4. Click the blue, “Join with Computer Audio” button.
5. In order to enable video, click on “Start Video” in the bottom left-hand corner of the screen. This menu bar is also where you can mute/unmute your audio.
3 Option 2 Videoconference with Phone Call Audio:
1. From your computer, click on the following link that is also included in the Meeting Calendar Invitation: https://pencleanenergy.zoom.us/j/83834724993.
2. The Zoom Application will open on its own or you will be instructed to Open Zoom.
3. After the application opens, the pop-up screen below will appear asking you to choose ONE of the audio conference options. Click on the Phone Call option at the top of the pop-up screen.
4. Please dial +1 (253) 215-8782.
5. You will be instructed to enter the meeting ID: 838-3472-4993 followed by #.
6. You will be instructed to enter in your participant ID. Your participant ID is unique to you and is what connects your phone number to your Zoom account.
7. After a few seconds, your phone audio should be connected to the Zoom application on your computer.
8. In order to enable video, click on “Start Video” in the bottom left-hand corner of the screen. This menu bar is also where you can mute/unmute your audio.
Audio Only Options:
Please note that if you call in/use the audio only option, you will not be able to see the speakers or any presentation materials in real time.
Option 3: Calling in via Telephone/Landline:
1. Dial +1 (253) 215-8782.
2. You will be instructed to enter the meeting ID: 838-3472-4993 followed by #.
3. You will be instructed to enter your Participant ID followed by #. If you do not have a participant ID or do not know it, you can press # to stay on the line.
4. You will be instructed to enter the meeting passcode 2075 followed by #. 4 Item No. 1
PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY AUTHORITY
JPA Board Correspondence
DATE: May 4, 2022
COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None
VOTE REQUIRED: Majority Present
TO: Honorable Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Executive Committee FROM: Jan Pepper, Chief Executive Officer, Peninsula Clean Energy Authority SUBJECT: Resolution to Make Findings Allowing Continued Remote Meetings Under Brown Act
RECOMMENDATION: ..titl e
Adopt a resolution finding that, as a result of the continuing COVID-19 pandemic state of emergency declared by Governor Newsom, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
..body
BACKGROUND:
On June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which rescinded his prior Executive Order N-29-20 and set a date of October 1, 2021 for public agencies to transition back to public meetings held in full compliance with the Brown Act. The original Executive Order provided that all provisions of the Brown Act that required the physical presence of members or other personnel as a condition of participation or as a quorum for a public meeting were waived for public health reasons. If these waivers fully sunset on October 1, 2021, legislative bodies subject to the Brown Act would have to contend with a sudden return to full compliance with in-person meeting requirements as they existed prior to March 2020, including the requirement for full physical public access to all teleconference locations from which committee members were participating.
On September 16, 2021, the Governor signed AB 361, a bill that formalizes and modifies the teleconference procedures implemented by California public agencies in response to the Governor’s Executive Orders addressing Brown Act compliance during shelter-in-place periods. AB 361 allows a local agency to continue to use teleconferencing under the same basic rules as provided in the Executive Orders when certain circumstances occur or when certain findings have been made and adopted by the local agency. On January 5, 2022, Governor Newsom extended the sunset provision of AB361 and Government Code Section 11133(g) from January 31, 2022 to April 1, 2022 due to the surge in Omicron variant related COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations. 5 Item No. 1
AB 361 requires that, if the state of emergency remains active for more than thirty (30) days, the agency must make findings by majority vote to continue using the bill’s exemption to the Brown Act teleconferencing rules. The findings are to the effect that the need for teleconferencing persists due to the nature of the ongoing public health emergency and the social distancing recommendations of local public health officials.
Effectively, this means that agencies, including PCEA, must agendize a Brown Act meeting and make findings regarding the circumstances of the emergency on a thirty (30) day basis. If at least thirty (30) days have transpired since its last meeting, the Committees must vote whether to continue to rely upon the law’s provision for teleconference procedures in lieu of in-person meetings.
AB 361 allows for meetings to be conducted virtually as long as there is a gubernatorially-proclaimed public emergency in combination with (1) local health official recommendations for social distancing or (2) adopted findings that meeting in person would present risks to health. AB 361 will now sunset on January 1, 2024.
On September 25, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361. Out of an abundance of caution given AB 361’s narrative that describes each legislative body’s responsibility to reauthorize remote meetings, staff and counsel brings this memo and corresponding resolution to the attention of the Executive Committee.
On September 29, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361.
On October 12, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361.
On November 8, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361.
On December 6, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361.
On January 10, 2022, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361.
On February 14, 2022, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361.
On March 14, 2022, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361.
On April 11, 2022, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361.
DISCUSSION:
6 Item No. 1
Because of continuing concerns regarding COVID-19 transmission, especially when individuals are grouped together in close quarters, it is recommended that the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee avail itself of the provisions of AB 361 allowing continuation of online meetings by adopting findings to the effect that conducting in-person meetings would present risk to the health and safety of attendees. A resolution to that effect and directing staff to agendize the renewal of such findings in the event that thirty (30) days has passed since the Committee’s last meeting, is attached hereto. 7 28637147v1
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
* * * * * *
RESOLUTION FINDING THAT, AS A RESULT OF THE CONTINUING COVID-19
PANDEMIC STATE OF EMERGENCY DECLARED BY GOVERNOR NEWSOM,
MEETING IN PERSON FOR MEETINGS OF THE PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE WOULD PRESENT IMMINENT RISKS TO THE HEALTH
OR SAFETY OF ATTENDEES
______________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, the Governor proclaimed pursuant to his authority under the California Emergency Services Act, California Government Code section 8625, that a state of emergency exists with regard to a novel coronavirus (a disease now known as COVID-19); and
WHEREAS, on June 4, 2021, the Governor clarified that the “reopening” of California on June 15, 2021 did not include any change to the proclaimed state of emergency or the powers exercised thereunder, and as of the date of this Resolution, neither the Governor nor the Legislature have exercised their respective powers pursuant to California Government Code section 8629 to lift the state of emergency either by proclamation or by concurrent resolution in the state Legislature; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 that suspended the teleconferencing rules set forth in the California Open Meeting law, Government Code section 54950 et seq. (the “Brown Act”), provided certain requirements were met and followed; and
8 28637147v1
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 that provides that a legislative body subject to the Brown Act may continue to meet without fully complying with the teleconferencing rules in the Brown Act provided the legislative body determines that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, and further requires that certain findings be made by the legislative body every thirty (30) days; and,
WHEREAS, Governor Newsom extended the sunset provision of AB361 and Government Code Section 11133(g) to January 1, 2024 due to surges and instability inCOVID-19 cases; and,
WHEREAS, California Department of Public Health (“CDPH”) and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) caution that COVID-19 continues to be highly transmissible and that even fully vaccinated individuals can spread the virus to others; and,
WHEREAS, the Committee has an important governmental interest in protecting the health, safety and welfare of those who participate in its meetings; WHEREAS, on September 25, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361. Out of an abundance of caution given AB 361’s narrative that describes each legislative body’s responsibility to reauthorize remote meetings, staff and counsel bring this resolution to the attention of the Executive Committee, and; 9 28637147v1
WHEREAS, on September 29, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361, and;
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361, and;
WHEREAS, on November 8, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361, and;
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361, and;
WHEREAS, on January 10, 2022, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361, and;
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2022, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361, and;
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2022, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361, and;
10 28637147v1
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2022, the Peninsula Clean Energy Executive Committee approved a thirty (30) day extension of remote meetings in accordance with AB 361, and;
WHEREAS, in the interest of public health and safety, as affected by the emergency caused by the spread of COVID-19, the Committee deems it necessary to find that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, and thus intends to invoke the provisions of AB 361 related to teleconferencing.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that
1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct.
2. The Committee finds that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
3. Staff is directed to return no later than thirty (30) days, or, alternatively, at the next scheduled meeting of the Committee, after the adoption of this resolution with an item for the Committee to consider making the findings required by AB 361 in order to continue meeting under its provisions.
4. Staff is directed to take such other necessary or appropriate actions to implement the intent and purposes of this resolution.
* * * * * *
11 Item No. 2
Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee of the
Peninsula Clean Energy Authority (PCEA)
Minutes
Monday, April 11, 2022
10:00 a.m.
Zoom Video Conference and Teleconference
CALL TO ORDER
Meeting was called to order at 10:01 a.m. in virtual teleconference.
ROLL CALL
Participating Remotely:
Dave Pine, San Mateo County
Rick DeGolia, Atherton, Chair
Donna Colson, Burlingame, Vice Chair
Giselle Hale, Redwood City
Marty Medina, San Bruno
Laura Parmer-Lohan, San Carlos
Jeff Aalfs, Portola Valley
Pradeep Gupta, Director Emeritus
John Keener, Director Emeritus
Absent:
Julia Mates, Belmont
Rick Bonilla, San Mateo
A quorum was established.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
ACTION TO SET AGENDA AND TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS MOTION: Director Parmer-Lohan moved, seconded by Director Hale to set the Agenda and approve Agenda Item Numbers 1-2.
1. Adopt Findings Pursuant to AB 361 to Continue Fully Teleconferenced Committee Meetings Due to Health Risks Posed by In-Person Meetings
2. Approval of the Minutes for the March 14, 2022 Executive Committee Meeting MOTION PASSED: 7-0 (Absent: Belmont, San Mateo)
12 Item No. 2
JURISDICTION BOARD MEMBER YES NO ABSTAIN ABSENT
San Mateo County Director Pine X
Atherton Director DeGolia X
Belmont Director Mates X
Burlingame Director Colson X
Redwood City Director Hale X
San Bruno Director Medina X
San Carlos Director Parmer-LohanX
San Mateo Director Bonilla X
Portola Valley Director Aalfs X
Totals 7 2
REGULAR AGENDA
3. Chair Report
None
4. CEO Report
Jan Pepper, CEO, provided a report that covered the following topics: hiring status for COO and CFO and an update on legislation including AB 1814 and SB 1158.
Chair DeGolia asked if the unions opposed AB 1814 because it would result in less union jobs. Jan responded that the utilities can earn a rate of return on capital improvements such as EV infrastructure. Peninsula Clean Energy has been working with unions as part of the EV Ready Program. Marc Hershman, Director of Government Affairs explained that the unions that sent in a letter of opposition are closely aligned with the Investor Owned Utilities (IOU) and are in line to receive the work. These are not the same local unions that work with Peninsula Clean Energy. Jeremy Waen, Director of Regulatory Policy expanded that the work envisioned under AB 1814 would be behind the meter and should not impact the in front of the meter work that the unions predominantly handle.
Director Emeritus Gupta shared that bills like these have two sides to consider, one is the need and the other is the politics. Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs) are facing political opposition. Peninsula Clean Energy, as a CCA, needs to think about how to tackle this opposition, which is based on politics, not need. There will be lots of situations like this and we need to address this in a serious fashion.
Director Medina shared that while this news is disappointing, Peninsula Clean Energy needs to be in front of the labor groups, so they understand Peninsula Clean Energy’s position. Director Medina suggested that Director Bonilla could help with strategy in this area, but that having an additional person to lead this effort could be beneficial.
Chair DeGolia shared that a main issue is different unions are working at the state level and getting work from the IOUs. Peninsula Clean Energy’s unions would be more local, and it would be helpful if they could get engaged in these efforts. 13 Item No. 2
Director Hale expanded that it might be helpful to have a subcommittee or brainstorming session with Director Bonilla and others to approach local labor unions and have the conversation move forward.
Chair DeGolia asked Jeremy Waen and Marc Hershman to brainstorm ideas on how to approach this going forward. Jan suggested it would be worth a brainstorming session with interested board members. Vice Chair Colson suggested talking to Assemblymember Grayson first and then to bring it back to the Executive Committee.
Jan explained that the Cal CCA is taking the lead on this bill.
5. Update on Six-Month Strategic Plan Status (Discussion) Jan Pepper, CEO, introduced the Peninsula Clean Energy Semi-annual Strategic Plan Update to include the following priorities:
- Design a power portfolio that is sourced by 100% carbon-free energy* by 2025 that aligns supply and consumer demand on a 24x7 basis
- Contribute to San Mateo County reaching the state’s goal to be 100% greenhouse gas-free for transportation and buildings by 2035 *carbon-free = California RPS renewable excluding biomass Siobhan Doherty, Director of Power Resources, gave an update on the Power Resources Strategic Plan Process.
Rafael Reyes, Director of Energy Programs, gave an update on the Programs Strategic Plan Process.
KJ Janowski, Director of Marketing and Community Relations, gave an update on the Marketing and Community Relations Strategic Plan Process.
Leslie Brown, Director of Account Services, gave an update on the Account Services Strategic Plan Process.
Jeremy Waen, Director of Regulatory Policy, and Marc Hershman, Director of Government Affairs, gave an update on the Public Policy Strategic Plan Process.
Jan Pepper gave an update on both the Financial Stewardship and Organizational Excellence Strategic Plan Process.
Director Emeritus Gupta asked if data on coincidence of contracted energy versus non-coincidence of demand could be included in future reports, and asked how the load forecast for long-term energy procurement contracts impacts the success ratio of customer programs. Siobhan explained that the first Key Performance Indicator (KPI) of 2025 100% RE (Renewable Energy) 24/7 is intended to show how much of the current load is being served on an hourly bases by the renewable supply, which is currently 52%.
Siobhan also explained that Power Resources is working with Energy Programs to incorporate programmatic efforts into the load forecast.
Director Medina asked about the reality of reaching the goal of 100% RE by 2025. Siobhan responded that many scenarios are being evaluated and will be shared with the 24/7 14 Item No. 2
Subcommittee and that the once the modeling is refined, that would be shared in part two of the 24/7 White Paper, which should be published in the Spring of 2022.
Vice Chair Colson asked about the financial feasibility of some projects due to rising costs.
Siobhan explained that from the Request for Offers (RFO) in January, the bids went through a shortlist process taking into account milestone objectives and price challenges from sourcing lithium ion batteries and lithium carbonate. More projects were shortlisted than we needed to ensure Peninsula Clean Energy will still have enough projects to move forward if some drop out.
Director Hale asked if this data could be tracked with a visualization to indicate if a goal is on or off target.
Chair DeGolia asked about the time and effort put into the planning and procurement stage versus the operations stage. Siobhan explained that currently more staff resources are spent on planning and procurement, but as more projects come online efforts will shift to operations.
Director Hale asked for clarification on the status of some of the program goals. Rafael explained that while things are currently challenging, increase in the purchase of new electric vehicles (EV) will continue to put pressure on properties to install more EV charging ports.
Director Parmer-Lohan noted that the latest survey of San Carlos residents indicated that 30% have electric vehicles and expressed concern on the lack of EV chargers. She asked if the installation of 6,200 EV charges would be enough. Rafael explained while even this goal wouldn’t be enough, he believes the adoption rate will trends towards natural adoption to help close the gap. Director Parmer-Lohan suggested identifying locations for EV chargers that would also provide a lift to local businesses.
Vice Chair Colson asked if the EV charging port goal of 6,200 ports included private installations. Rafael explained that this number is solely a Peninsula Clean Energy incentivized target and that there are plans for tracking all installations, in addition to Peninsula Clean Energy installations, in the future.
Chair DeGolia noted that high electricity rates are adversely affecting decarbonization.
Vice Chair Colson asked about brand recognition between Peninsula Clean Energy and PG&E and if a rebranding strategy is needed. KJ explained that the Executive Committee did not want to pursue a name change when Los Banos was added to the organization, but that the brand recognition may be more related to not being visible because we don’t send bills directly to the customers.
Vice Chair Colson asked if other Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs) were moving away from the 5% discount. Jan explained that we are the only CCA that has had a consistent discount since we started, but that Peninsula Clean Energy would look into this further. Vice Chair Colson asked for clarification on if a larger discount were being considered or if the 5% would remain the same. Jan explained that this year Peninsula Clean Energy would be doing a cost-of-service study to understand the effects of a pricing change away from being tied to PG&E’s rates, and that continuing to have our rates below PG&E’s rates is important.
15 Item No. 2
Chair DeGolia asked if Peninsula Clean Energy was actively targeting an A credit rating.
Jan explained that we have been in conversations with Moody’s and the rating agencies, but that we have not been focused on these agency ratings. She continued that our Investment Grade rating is good, and that we have a high number of days cash on hand.
Director Emeritus Gupta wanted to highlight that there are two parts to consider in cost of service: how much revenue we need and how to distribute this among our customers.
Public Comment: Bill Nack
6. Update on Customer Arrearage Programs - CAPP and AMP (Discussion) Leslie Brown, Director of Account Services, gave a presentation with an update on customer arrearage programs, California Arrearage Payment Program (CAPP) and Arrears Management Plan (AMP) including information on CAPP customer priority groups, application and allocation timeline, and AMP eligibility.
Vice Chair Colson asked what the total write-off would be for Peninsula Clean Energy.
Leslie explained that the CAPP program has rules which require suspending collections and that in the Fall of 2021, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) directed PG&E to automatically enroll any customer with a past due balance in a 24-month repayment plan. These two factors make predicting how much may need to be taken at a loss difficult to predict.
7. Update on Los Banos Enrollment (Discussion)
Leslie Brown gave an update on the Los Banos enrollment. Accounts began transitioning on April 1st following a final read of meters from PG&E. Pre-enrollment notices were sent out 60 and 30-days before enrollment. 12,600 customers were sent pre-enrollment notices. There are currently 243 opt-outs which is under 2%. Leslie explained that there will likely be more opt-outs as Peninsula Clean Energy begins appearing on the bills which many customers can misconstrue as additional charges.
8. Committee Members’ Reports
Chair DeGolia shared that Peninsula Clean Energy is partnered with Harvest Thermal who will be appearing at Holbrook Parmer Park for Atherton’s Earth Day event.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 12:01 p.m.
16 Item No. 5
PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY AUTHORITY
JPA Board Correspondence
DATE: May 4, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None
VOTE REQUIRED: None
TO: Honorable Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Executive Committee FROM: Kirsten Andrews-Schwind, Senior Manager of Community Relations and Vanessa Shin, Community Outreach Associate
SUBJECT: 2021 Work Plan Deliverables for the Citizens Advisory Committee BACKGROUND:
In 2021, the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee. This work plan detailed specific tasks to be undertaken on a voluntary basis by ad hoc working groups of Citizen Advisory Committee members.
The Citizens Advisory Committee has completed many of the projects on the 2021 work plan and would like to submit their deliverables.
DISCUSSION:
Each working group of the Citizens Advisory Committee has submitted a brief report describing their progress on their specified task.
The list of 2021 Citizens Advisory Committee working groups can be found in Table 1.
The submitted deliverables for each working group are included below.
Table 1. 2021 Citizens Advisory Committee Projects
Project Description Staff
Liaison
CAC Members
(*Lead)
Assist with
design and
launch of
income-qualified
home
upgrade
program
Assist staff with a) community relationships and
outreach, and b) technical design guidelines
and outcomes for the program.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing input on
technical design guidelines and outcomes for
the program.
Alejandra
Posada,
Programs
Team
Diane Bailey*,
Janet Creech,
Kathryn Green
17 Item No. 5
-2-
Support
building
electrification
Conduct community education about reach
codes and other electrification measures and
their importance to GHG reduction goals.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing
community education conducted by CAC
members regarding reach codes.
Rafael
Reyes,
Programs
Team
Jason
Mendelson*,
Diane Bailey,
Ray Larios,
Daniel
Baerwaldt
Assess EV
charging
infrastructure
permitting
processes
Conduct an assessment of current EV charging
infrastructure permitting processes across PCE
jurisdictions, focusing on those that have not yet
begun streamlining these processes.
Deliverable: Written assessment of EV charging
permitting processes.
Phillip
Kobernick,
Programs
Team
Cheryl Schaff*
Support site
identification
for
Community
Solar DER
installations
Research possible sites for community solar
development in disadvantaged communities and
introduce local site managers to PCE staff.
Deliverable: Email introductions to local site
managers.
Peter Levitt
and Dave
Fribush,
Programs
Team
Desiree
Thayer*,
Alex Melendrez
Microgrids
research
Conduct a literature review on methods for
establishing quantifiable value streams for
societal and customer-level benefits of
microgrids.
Deliverable: Summary of findings and annotated
literature review with citations and links.
Peter Levitt
and Dave
Fribush,
Programs
Team
Michael
Closson*,
Ray Larios,
Jason
Mendelson
Review DER
program
grading and
evaluation
criteria
Provide feedback to staff on criteria for choosing
future community Distributed Energy Resources
projects, emphasizing diverse perspectives.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing feedback
to staff.
Peter Levitt
and Dave
Fribush,
Programs
Team
Jason
Mendelson*,
Michael
Closson,
Janet Creech
Assist with
distribution
and
replication of
PCE
Leverage the impact of an existing PCE
educational resources by getting it implemented
in more schools and youth programs.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing actions
taken to expand the use of PCE student activity
packet.
KJ,
Marketing
Team
Janet Creech*,
Ray Larios,
Desiree
Thayer, Daniel
Baerwaldt
18 Citizens Advisory Committee
Home Upgrade Program Working Group
Deliverable Report
DATE: April 29, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
In 2021 the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee. This work plan detailed specific tasks to be undertaken on a voluntary basis by ad hoc working groups of Citizen Advisory Committee members.
The work plan also describes deliverables for these tasks, usually reporting back to the Board on the working group activities.
The specified task for this working group is to provide feedback and recommendations on the draft guidelines for the new Low-Income Turnkey Electrification & Home Upgrade Program before it launches and to monitor the program after it launches.The deliverable for this working group is to correspond with the staff lead for the program and provide feedback on the program. Citizen Advisory Committee members Diane Bailey, Janet Creech, Katie Green, and Alexander Melendrez participated in this working group.
DISCUSSION
This working group initially met monthly and after the program launched, decided to meet every two months to monitor progress. The workgroup reviewed and commented on the draft guidelines for the program. We recommended increasing the cost cap per household to allow for replacement of gas furnaces with heat pump heaters that also provide cooling in the same device. The group and staff also exchanged information on how to best conduct outreach to potentially qualifying households.
The program launch went very well with many more households expressing interest than available slots in the program. The working group discussed how to make the funding stretch to provide the most benefits per household. Our working group would like to continue to monitor and support the program as more homes are upgraded.
Alejandra Posada is the staff liaison and has shared program metrics and information with our workgroup in bimonthly updates. Our working group is small; we welcome other interested CAC members to join us.
Signed Diane Bailey, Janet Creech, Katie Green and Alexander Melendrez 19 Citizens Advisory Committee
Building Electrification Working Group
Deliverable Report
DATE: April 29, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
In 2021 the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee. This work plan detailed specific tasks to be undertaken on a voluntary basis by ad hoc working groups of Citizen Advisory Committee members.
The work plan also describes deliverables for these tasks, usually reporting back to the Board on the working group activities.
The specified task for this working group is to conduct community education about reach codes and other electrification measures and their importance to GHG reduction goals.
The deliverable for this working group is to create a Brief memo summarizing community education conducted by CAC members regarding reach codes. Citizen Advisory Committee members Jason Mendelson, Diane Bailey, Daniel Baerwaldt, and Ray Larios participated in this working group.
DISCUSSION
This working group met monthly and reviewed the current state of the push for reach code adoption in the PCE jurisdiction and beyond. The group and staff exchanged information on how to best reach out to our networks and support reach code adoption.
The members of the group attended municipal meetings to help educate and expand the adoption of reach codes. The members of the group met with other community groups to help share information on the same. The goal of exchanging information and mobilization for support of reach codes was met. Reach code adoption went well beyond the initial goal, and the working group discussed how to expand the reach codes for reach code 2.0, and how a working group like this may be able to continue to support the current and future adoptions of reach codes. Rafael Reyes as staff liaison provided enormous troves of information and sought input from the working group on his and the staffs’ work in this space. This working group also prepared a draft of a resolution that what was eventually adopted by the CAC as recommendations for the Board 2035 Decarbonization Subcommittee in support of the draft framework on achieving zero carbon by 2035.
We would recommend expanding and reforming the working group to work on either reach code adoption or support for the decarbonization efforts of PCE in the future.
Signed Jason Mendelson, Diane Bailey, and Daniel Baerwaldt 20 Citizens Advisory Committee
EV Charging Permitting Working Group
Deliverable Report
DATE: April 29, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
In 2021 the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee. This work plan detailed specific tasks to be undertaken on a voluntary basis by ad hoc working groups of Citizen Advisory Committee members.
The work plan also describes deliverables for these tasks, usually reporting back to the Board on the working group activities.
The specified task for this working group is to assess current EV charging infrastructure permitting processes across Peninsula Clean Energy jurisdictions, focusing on those that have not yet begun streamlining these processes. The goal of this working group was to assess each jurisdiction's status on the GO-Biz statewide map of EV charging infrastructure permit streamlining. The table below describes the scoring system by which jurisdictions are assessed through GO-Biz. Citizen Advisory Committee member Cheryl Schaff participated in this working group. The deliverable for this working group is a written assessment of EV charging permitting processes.
DISCUSSION
I contacted all 21 entities in the county, had pleasant conversations with dozens of people while trying to find staff responsible for streamlining (still waiting to confirm exactly correct contact in two cases), providing a gentle nudge toward becoming compliant AND completing the steps that GO-Biz requires for “green” status on their map. Responses have been more robust in the current state of the pandemic than they were during lockdowns. But I heard more than once that communities are struggling to staff their departments, even when offering nice salaries.
Compliance with AB 1236 and AB 970 is provided by different employees in different cities. Some cities have been careful to ensure that their compliance not only allows for quick and easy permitting, but that they complete every step required by GO-Biz to ensure best status on the map. Others say they churn out permits quickly but are not 21 aware of or concerned with GO-Biz status. San Mateo County recently got a request from GO-Biz about why they were not compliant, so GO-Biz may be conducting a nudging process similar to mine for PCE.
A couple of communities moved from “yellow” to “green” in response to my nudge. A number of still “yellow” cities, will become “green” soon, if they follow through on their recent commitments to take the one or two steps they have left to complete. I feel that I made progress.
The work is not finished; I’m sure I’ll continue to get email responses and phone calls from staff in several cities. In some cases, there seem to be huge discrepancies between communities saying they award permits for EVCS quickly—even instantaneously—and their Go-Biz Map status. I’m sure more conversations with city and GO-Biz personnel will reveal the source of the discrepancies.
Please let me know if you want me to continue gently nudging San Mateo County entities to become compliant in the eyes of GO-Biz. Kirsten said in a recent CAC discussion that you do not. In that case, I’ve submitted my working notes about contacts, conversations, discoveries and progress to staff.
Cheryl Schaff
CITIES’ STATUS
Green per GO-Biz
Brisbane
Burlingame
Foster City
Menlo Park
Pacifica
Redwood City
San Carlos
San Mateo
Yellow per GO-Biz
Atherton
Belmont—checklist should be posted in 2 weeks
Half Moon Bay—will post checklist soon
Portola Valley—Plng & Bldg Dir says they’re compliant with spirit of law San Bruno—checklist going up soon
South San Francisco—in practicality process streamlined; will take 2 steps missing soon
Woodside—will check later this week
Red per GO-Biz
Daily City—see notes
East Palo Alto—no funds for staff to work on
Hillsborough
Millbrae—believes they’re compliant
San Mateo County—says process, in practicality, is streamlined; see notes 22 Citizens Advisory Committee
Community Solar Site Identification
Working Group Deliverable Report
DATE: April 29, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
In 2021 the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee. This work plan detailed specific tasks to be undertaken on a voluntary basis by ad hoc working groups of Citizen Advisory Committee members.
The work plan also describes deliverables for these tasks, usually reporting back to the Board on the working group activities.
The specified task for this working group is to research possible sites for community solar development in disadvantaged communities and introduce local site managers to PCE staff. The deliverable for this working group is email introductions to local site managers. Citizen Advisory Committee members Desiree Thayer and Alex Melendrez participated in this working group.
DISCUSSION
The working group met with PCE staff (Dave Fribush and Peter Levitt) for a kickoff meeting on June 8, 2021. Dave shared details about the community solar DER installation programs, including both the Disadvantaged Community Green Tariff (DAC-GT) and Community Solar Green Tariff (CS-GT). Alex Melendrez created a shared spreadsheet for working group members to share organizations and points of contact with Dave.
PCE staff provided an update of the DAC-GT and CS-GT programs at the Board of Directors meeting in June. Following this meeting, Desiree Thayer contacted Board member Flor Nicholas, and Flor introduced the city staff member for capital projects. A meeting was arranged with the working group, Dave, and several City of South San Francisco (SSF) staff members. At that meeting on July 23, 2021, Dave shared details of the DAC-GT and CS-GT programs and site criteria, and the City of SSF staff shared potential community solar sites and community partners.
The working group continued to reach out to other organizations for site identification. In October, 2021, the working group was put on hold as the DAC-GT program was changing with the addition of 350+ Los Banos customers. This change did not affect the CS-GT project and need to find locations in San Mateo County. Dave informed the working group that he would re-engage following solicitation of DAC-GT customers.
PCE ran its solicitation for permanent DAC-GT and CS-GT resources but did not receive any bids for CS-GT projects. The immediate focus will be on executing an 23 agreement for the DAC-GT allocation, after which attention can be turned to the CS-GT allocation. It should be noted that no CCA in California has received CS-GT bids, and staff expects that the small size of these projects, combined with the additional requirements on project developers, have been a deterrent. The CPUC is monitoring this and may be considering changes to facilitate more deployments. 24 Citizens Advisory Committee
Microgrids Research Working Group
Deliverable Report
DATE: April 29, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
In 2021 the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee. This work plan detailed specific tasks to be undertaken on a voluntary basis by ad hoc working groups of Citizen Advisory Committee members.
The work plan also describes deliverables for these tasks, usually reporting back to the Board on the working group activities.
The specified task for this working group is to Conduct a literature review on methods for establishing quantifiable value streams for societal and customer-level benefits of microgrids. The deliverable for this working group is to create a summary of findings and annotated literature review with citations and links. Citizen Advisory Committee members Jason Mendelson, Michael Closson, and Ray Larios participated in this working group.
DISCUSSION
This group evaluated a couple of research papers and provided a summary of the literature (reports attached). After initially meeting, and preparing the first two reports, we did not meet again or discuss the findings of the reports or establish a protocol for future reports.
We do not believe we met our goals, which included helping to prepare PCE for microgrids, but we believe this is a worthwhile endeavor and that the research should be conducted as soon as possible.
The two of us in the working group believe that there should be more advocacy, in addition to more research and meetings and discussion on this important topic and opportunity.
Signed Jason Mendelson and Michael Closson
25 DATE: August 24, 2021
TO: PCE’s DER Microgrid Team
FROM: Michael Closson
SUBJECT: Report on Microgrid Knowledge’s Special Report: Why Energy-as-a Service Microgrids are the Logical Next Step for California . . . and the Rest of the U.S.
Chapter 1 — The Cost of Power Outages in an Era of Climate Change • Destructive extreme weather events are becoming more frequent leading to a great increase in grid-based power outages.
• These power outages not only are inconvenient, they are dangerous and economically costly.
• California has been hard-hit by power outages and is also seeking to phase out fossil fuels. Hence, it makes sense for our leaders and citizenry to seriously undertake the development of microgrids.
Chapter 2 — Why Microgrids are at an Inflection Point
• Benefits of microgrids:
o Can seamlessly “island” themselves when a power outage occurs and then reconnect to the grid when the power is restored.
o Can use several different types of generators: e.g. solar, batteries, combined heat and power, and gas-fired generators
o Have sophisticated software and control systems that allow for “advanced energy management” — e.g. switching back and forth to the grid depending on the price of grid-based electricity.
o PG&E plans to rely on microgrids to power a significant number of its customers during future power safety shutoffs.
• Microgrid economics are now compelling
o Costs of building and operating are declining linked to a drop in the price tag for solar and batteries
o They can help energy users manage utility demand charges. o They can generate revenue for their owners by selling services to the grid. o They can be aggregated contractually into “virtual power plants” that offer grid services of a greater magnitude.
• Increased need for reliable electricity
o The digital economy requires reliable electric power. • Increased corporate interest in sustainability
o Installing microgrids enable corporate leaders to take control of their companies’ energy supply, thereby helping them fulfill their environmental, societal and economic responsibilities (ESG focus on “corporate citizenship”). • Desire for local control of energy
26 2
o CCAs and others are interested in taking more control of their energy production and use.
• Innovative microgrid financing models make them more appealing and affordable Chapter 3 — Energy-as-a-Service: Making Microgrids Easy and Affordable • Under the energy-as-a-service model, the customer takes on none of the burden associated with a microgrid’s capital investment nor its operation. That is handled by third-party operators and investors.
• A microgrid customer pays a charge for receiving the microgrid’s benefits. In California, that charge is likely to be no higher than what one currently pays for electricity. • An energy-as-a-service contract may also assume costs for energy efficiency upgrades, off-site renewables, and load optimization, which can further improve project economics.
• A third-party owner can design an energy-as-a-service contract that takes a customer’s other embedded energy costs (e.g. missed opportunities for energy efficiency) into account. The length of the contract can be adjusted as well. • In some cases, companies have multiple facilities which the energy-as-a-service provider can link virtually or contractually.
• Already, 31% of total microgrid capacity operates under the energy-as-a-service model.
Chapter 4 — Why microgrids are the next logical step
• Microgrids enhance energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy. • Short-term, microgrids keep the lights on.
• Long-term, they help to reduce carbon emissions.
• Also, they help to moderate the cost of operating the grid — e.g. providing the ability to manage intermittency, reduce the need for new grid infrastructure. • As their numbers increase, microgrids will start to interact with each other, sharing resources and coordinating activities to achieve levels of efficiency and reliability not possible with today’s centralized grid — “a grid of microgrids.” • Microgrid examples (described)
o Blue Lake Rancheria Microgrid — Humboldt County
o Stone Edge Farm Microgrid — Sonoma County
o Gordon Bubolz Nature Preserve — Appleton, Wisconsin
o Port of Long Beach Microgrid — Long Beach, CA — serves as site for agencies and other interested parties to visit and learn about microgrids.
Chapter 5 — The AlphaStruxure Energy Vision: From Coast to Coast • This page is a pitch for potential microgrid customers to consider employing a joint venture called AlphaStruxure formed by the Carlyle Group and Schneider Electric. 27 3
Link: Microgrid Business Models and Value Chains by Schneider Electric • Typical Business Models
o Customer-owned — all financial risk on customer
o Microgrids-as-a-service — third party development and financing (a PPA which may have an equity or debt financing structure)
o Pay as you go — by customers (typically small remote systems) • Microgrid Categories
o Off-grid facilities (e.g. remote military bases and industrial sites) o Off-grid communities (e.g. an island)
o Grid-connected facility (e.g. a campus or hospital)
o Grid-connected community (e.g. small municipalities or district of a city) Three Charts displaying the different microgrid categories 28 4
29 Reviewed by Jason Mendelson
July 28, 2021
How New Microgrid Technologies Enable Optimal Cooperation Among Distributed Energy Resources by Veronuque Boutin et al. Schneider Electric 10 pages
Discussing how microgrids work. How they are coordinated new systems and require forethought and planning.
There are figures and examples of how they would work in a system, and what tech is needed.
• A collection of: network infrastructure – generation, distribution and understanding of users/consume
• Sensors, meters and network protection
• Controls for DER level
• Controls for management level to optimize
• Supervisory controls for data gathering and operators • Cloud based services for management for load, tariff management, demand response, self consumption – blackout and C02 reduction Need to balance needs – resiliency, economy, security and CO2 reduction– all need to be evaluated and also there will need to be technological innovation to accomplish the goals. This may not be ready-to-wear yet. But key is evaluating goals/priorities and PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES and then assessing particular systems to accomplish these.
Looks at different systems – From Grid only – versus from local sources and storage “Island” vs. “grid connected” vs. hybrid systems
Discussion of Safety and protecting people/property from faults. Inherent difficulties with multi-source systems. Discussion of Solar and low danger with those, but how the bi-directional energy flow can be a challenge. This all requires project specific energy studies.
Discussion of power Quality: need to track and react to all the electricity measurements.
Harmonics (and pollution from same), frequency variations, transients, voltage sags and wells, can all cause problems (page 5). Need to be able to measure these to manage. Reliability is key or this won’t work.
30 Discussion of Stability– classic grid all works the same, once DERs are introduced, then need stability and control to integrate. This includes proper controls and planning. Control loops that are automatic. Once inverters (from solar, wind etc..) get introduced they can cause asynchronous voltage issues.
Possible Solutions: Inverter-Based Generators “IBG” (a. Renewable DER – like Solar; b. electronic-based inverters with volate and frequency control loops (though innovation); c storage that is decoupled generation from load demand for smoothing variability. Use VSG – Virtual Synchronix Generators to mimic existing systems (p. 7); balancing power amongst DERs through “secondary” regulations using power management algorithms – to create a system to manage the flows. IBG can allow for Grid-forming capabilities.
Discussion of optimization– by balancing control of the power, which systems are on, how it is stored, accounting for tariffs, weather, all planned and controlled for optimization – this requires planning and analytics on all fronts. Proposes a couple of models: 1. Central controller does everything; or 2. Have distributed micro-grid controllers – where each “actor” in the chain has control and helps the whole (possible benefits include redundancy and plug and play, more people/systems can help, more involved in the system optimization); or 3 a mix of the two
Jason's take away – I had not thought about the security aspect very much before, but that is a big component in this white paper. The rest makes sense about evaluating needs and goals and then designing appropriately.
Also – making sure that when adding microgrids, that the variability issues are addressed to keep stability for the grid and planning of the systems is key – considering all these factors.
31 Citizens Advisory Committee
Distributed Energy Resources Evaluation
Working Group Deliverable Report
DATE: April 29, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
In 2021 the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee. This work plan detailed specific tasks to be undertaken on a voluntary basis by ad hoc working groups of Citizen Advisory Committee members.
The work plan also describes deliverables for these tasks, usually reporting back to the Board on the working group activities.
The specified task for this working group is to Provide feedback to staff on criteria for choosing future community Distributed Energy Resources projects, emphasizing diverse perspectives. The deliverable for this working group is create a brief memo summarizing feedback to staff. Citizen Advisory Committee members Jason Mendelson, Michael Closson, and Janet Creech participated in this working group.
DISCUSSION
This group met twice, the second time being July 13, 2021, where the DER priorities of PCE were discussed. The group provided oral feedback on the presentation and Michael Closson prepared the attached response that will serve as our memo summarizing feedback to staff.
We believe the initial goals of reviewing and providing feedback on the program plan were met, but further evaluations meetings will be required to fully address the goals of the group and PCE. No other meetings occurred or were requested. We believe it would be valuable for staff to have CAC input on criteria and evaluation of DER programs going forward.
Signed Jason Mendelson, Michael Closson, and Janet Creech 32 Thoughts on today's meeting
Hi Peter, Jason and Janet,
I apologize for needing to leave today’s good meeting a little early — a guy showed up with some documents I needed to sign.
Also, I hope this is the correct format for sharing thoughts among us. That said, here are my thoughts:
• Peter did a good job explaining PCE’s four top DER priorities for achieving our target of 20MW of new local power generation.
• It is hard for me to imagine Peter and his colleagues fully developing all four of the top priorities simultaneously. So, I suggest that PCE needs to prioritize these priorities. • I think that "Residential PV and Storage” should be last on the priority list because • As we discussed, I think it will be very difficult to administer with a lot of hand-holding of customers required — leading to a good deal of staff time expended
• It is really nibbling away at the goal of 20MW of new power generation and as a result the staff would need to give a lot of attention to at least one of the other priorities as well • For the top among the priorities, I recommend “FTM Large Generation and Storage” for the following reasons:
• It would give PCE the most “bang for the buck” in terms of a good deal of new local power generation. • It avoids most of the BTM complexities and issues
• It enables optimizing the generating capacity at host sites • It does not contribute to PCE revenue erosion
• PCE could purchase all of the power generated for our own use • It could create some quite large generation facilities (e.g. at the San Carlos Airport) that would generate some good publicity for PCE
• The only other thought I have is not fully formed at this time but here goes. PCE’s business model (CCA in the middle) assumes that PCE must pursue an active and ongoing role in organizing DER projects in our service area all of the way to completion. I’m wondering if, in certain cases (e.g. with “FTM Large Generation and Storage”) we could simply sew the seeds and let the entity do the development and find funding itself with the understanding that we would purchase the excess power generated from it. (I think that Marin Clean Energy has taken this approach in some cases?)
I welcome your comments.
33 Citizens Advisory Committee
Educational Resources Working Group
Deliverable Report
DATE: April 29, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
In 2021 the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee. This work plan detailed specific tasks to be undertaken on a voluntary basis by ad hoc working groups of Citizen Advisory Committee members.
The work plan also describes deliverables for these tasks, usually reporting back to the Board on the working group activities.
The specified task for this working group is to leverage the impact of an existing PCE educational resources by getting it implemented in more schools and youth programs.
The deliverable for this working group is a brief memo summarizing actions taken to expand the use of PCE student activity packet. Citizen Advisory Committee members Janet Creech, Ray Larios, Desiree Thayer, and Daniel Baerwaldt participated in this working group.
DISCUSSION
This group did not meet during 2021.
34 Item No. 6
PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY AUTHORITY
JPA Board Correspondence
DATE: May 9, 2022
MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None
VOTE REQUIRED: None
TO: Honorable Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Executive Committee FROM: Kirsten Andrews-Schwind, Senior Manager of Community Relations and Vanessa Shin, Community Outreach Associate
SUBJECT: Updated Work Plan for the Citizens Advisory Committee BACKGROUND:
At its April 2021 regular meeting, the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors approved a work plan for its Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). This work plan included a list of specific projects that are important to PCE’s mission.
The Citizens Advisory Committee completed many of the projects on its previous work plan and would like to update it with a new list of projects.
DISCUSSION:
Staff from each department have been consulted on projects for which CAC collaboration would be useful. The CAC and staff shaped the workplan proposal together. In April 2022 CAC voted to approve sending this proposed work plan to the Executive Committee for discussion and the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors for approval.
Note that in addition to working on these specific projects, CAC members will also continue to serve in their core roles described below. This includes serving as community liaisons, which are critical for getting the word out about PCE programs and initiatives and conveying community feedback to the organization.
See the proposed 2022 work plan below.
35 Item No. 6
-2-
Peninsula Clean Energy Citizens Advisory Committee 2022 Work Plan Goal: Make it easy for CAC members to align with PCE staff priorities and get involved in driving PCE strategic initiatives
Brown Act reminder: Communication about working groups to must be limited to less than a quorum (50%) of CAC members
Guiding Principles
● Ensure PCE Staff and Board understand how to leverage CAC in a way that is useful and drives PCE strategic priorities
● Ensure CAC members feel fully engaged and utilized if they have interest and bandwidth
● Maximize efficiency of CAC impact on staff resources
CAC role & responsibilities:
Current Objectives:
● Act as liaison to community
● Provide feedback on PCE policy and operational objectives ● Engage in outreach to community, including encouraging ratepayers to participate in PCE offerings and programs, and implement other carbon reducing practices ● Assist with legislative advocacy in conjunction with staff and board ● Provide forum for community discussions on wide variety of strategies to reduce carbon emissions in conjunction with staff and board
PCE strategic goals for 2022
The CAC will support and align its work with these goals.
MISSION: To reduce greenhouse gas emissions by expanding access to sustainable and affordable energy solutions.
VISION: A sustainable world with clean energy for everyone.
Organizational priorities:
• Design a power portfolio that is sourced by 100% renewable energy by 2025 • Contribute to our community reaching a goal of being 100% greenhouse gas-free by 2035
Strategic plan on PCE website here
36 Item No. 6
-3-
2022 Peninsula Clean Energy Citizens Advisory Committee Working Group Proposals
Note: Once the specified deliverable is completed, the working group shall no longer meet unless a new deliverable is identified and it is requested to meet by staff.
Project Proposed Task Description and
Deliverables
Staff
Liaison
CAC Working
Group
Members (*
indicates lead)
Home
Upgrade
Program
Review data and results from the first
completed homes. Provide input on
technical design guidelines, outcomes
for the program, and future program
enhancement as needed.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing
input on technical design guidelines
and outcomes for the program
provided between June 2022 and
April 2023. Delivered to staff prior to
the April 2023 CAC meeting.
Alejandra
Posada,
Programs
Team
Building
Electrification
Education
Conduct community education around
the Reach Code 2.0 effort and/or
building electrification contribution to
2035 decarbonization goal.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing
community education conducted by
CAC members regarding reach codes
and/or building electrification between
June 2022 and April 2023. Delivered
to staff prior to the April 2023 CAC
meeting.
Rafael
Reyes,
Programs
Team
37 Item No. 6
-4-
Demand-Side
Strategies for
24/7 Grid
Decarboni-zation
Provide input on the Distributed
Energy Resources (DER) framework,
focusing on demand-side strategies
(e.g., load management / shaping) to
accomplish our planned 24/7 grid
decarbonization.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing
input for DER programs provided
between June 2022 and April 2023.
Delivered to staff prior to the April
2023 CAC meeting.
Peter Levitt
and Dave
Fribush,
Programs
Team
Education
Initiatives
Provide input on initiatives to expand
clean energy curriculum and
decarbonization projects in schools.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing
input on education initiatives provided
between June 2022 and April 2023.
Delivered to staff prior to the April
2023 CAC meeting.
Vanessa
Shin,
Marketing
Team
Role of Citizen
Advisory
Committees
Research the roles, objectives, basic
functioning, and impact to date of
citizen advisory committees at other
CCAs and similar public agencies in
California.
Deliverable: Brief memo summarizing
research on citizen advisory
committees and any resulting
recommendations for Peninsula
Clean Energy provided between June
2022 and April 2023. Delivered to
staff prior to the April 2023 CAC
meeting.
Kirsten
Andrews-Schwind,
Marketing
Team
38 Item No. 9
PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY AUTHORITY
JPA Board Correspondence
DATE: May 5, 2022
COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: May 9, 2022
SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None
VOTE REQUIRED: Majority Present
TO: Honorable Peninsula Clean Energy Authority Executive Committee FROM: Jan Pepper, Chief Executive Officer, Peninsula Clean Energy Authority SUBJECT: Review of Updated Peninsula Clean Energy Staff Organization Chart ..body
With the addition of a COO to the organization, attached is an updated organization chart reflecting the proposed responsibilities of the COO. This chart also provides all of the names and titles of our staff members and indicates where we are planning to hire for new positions. The listings under each department for staff members who have the same title are in alphabetical order.
Attachment:
Proposed Org Chart as of May 2, 2022
39 Board of Directors
CEO
Jan Pepper
Director of Power
Resources
Siobhan Doherty
Senior Power Resources
Manager
Chelsea Keys
Power Resources Manager
Sally Chen
Power Resources Manager
TBH
Senior Renewable Energy
and Compliance Analyst
Sara Maatta
Senior Renewable Energy
Analyst
Mehdi Shahriari
Intern
Greg Miller
Director of Regulatory
Affairs
Jeremy Waen
Senior Regulatory Analyst
Doug Karpa
Senior Regulatory Analyst
Matthew Rutherford
Compliance Analyst
TBH
Director of Govt Affairs
Marc Hershman
Executive Assistant/
Board Clerk/Office Manager
Nelly Wogberg
Legal
David Silberman, Jen
Stalzer, Ilana Mandelbaum-Parmer
Chief Operating Officer
Shawn Marshall
Director of Energy Programs
Rafael Reyes
Programs Manager
Blake Herrschaft
Programs Manager
Phillip Kobernick
Associate Programs
Manager
Peter Ambiel
Associate Manager,
Distributed Energy
Resources (DER)
Peter Levitt (50% time)
Associate Programs
Manager
Alejandra Posada
Director of Local Resources
TBH
Local Power Manager
(contractor)
Dave Fribush
Associate Manager,
Distributed Energy
Resources
Peter Levitt (50% time)
Director of Account Services
Leslie Brown
Strategic Accounts Manager
Sapna Dixit
Operations Specialist
Shayna Barnes
Account Services Analyst
Masha Doubrovskaia
Director of Marketing &
Community Relations
KJ Janowski
Senior Manager of
Community Relations
Kirsten Andrews-Schwind
Associate Manager of
Community Relations
Sandra Benetti
Community Outreach
Associate
Vanessa Shin
Senior Manager of
Marketing Communications
Gerald Gottheil
Digital Marketing
Specialist
Michael Arnaldo
Marketing
Communications
Specialist
Carlos Moreno
Media Relations
(contractor)
Darren Goode
Chief Innovation Officer
TBH
Chief Financial Officer
TBH
Senior Manager of Data &
Technology
Kim Le
IT Support (contractor)
Matthew Cegleski
Senior Financual Analyst
Hailey Wu
HR Manager
TBH
Proposed Organization
May 2, 2022
40