Item No. 2
Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee of the
Peninsula Clean Energy Authority (PCEA)
Minutes
Wednesday, October 12, 2022
10:00 a.m.
Zoom Video Conference and Teleconference
CALL TO ORDER
Meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m. in virtual teleconference.
ROLL CALL
Participating Remotely:
Dave Pine, San Mateo County
Rick DeGolia, Atherton, Chair
Julia Mates, Belmont
Donna Colson, Burlingame, Vice Chair
Giselle Hale, Redwood City
Marty Medina, San Bruno
Laura Parmer-Lohan, San Carlos arrived at 10:03 a.m.
Rick Bonilla, San Mateo
Jeff Aalfs, Portola Valley
Pradeep Gupta, Director Emeritus, arrived at 10:37 a.m.
John Keener, Director Emeritus
Absent:
A quorum was established.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
ACTION TO SET AGENDA AND TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS MOTION: Director Bonilla moved, seconded by Director Mates to set the Agenda and approve Agenda Item Number 1.
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 September 12, 2022 Executive Committee Meeting MOTION PASSED: 8-0 (Absent: San Carlos)
JURISDICTION BOARD MEMBER YES NO ABSTAIN ABSENT
San Mateo County Director Pine X
Item No. 2
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-Lohan X
San Mateo Director Bonilla X
Portola Valley Director Aalfs X
Totals 8 1
REGULAR AGENDA
3. Chair Report
Chair DeGolia reported that the CEO Review Subcommittee has met and will be meeting with Jan before the October 27, 2022 Board of Directors meeting where a closed session will be held.
4. CEO Report
Jan Pepper, Chief Executive Officer, provided a report that covered a staffing update, the upcoming CalCCA Board Retreat, the upcoming all-staff in-person meeting, and the PG&E Generation subsidiary.
Director Bonilla asked what PG&E is proposing to do with the funds raised. Jan explained that it appears the funds may be used for operating costs, hardening the grid for wildfire costs, and avoiding dilution of the stock value of the current company.
Chair DeGolia asked for information on the CalCCA Retreat agenda. Jan shared that some of the items on the agenda including jurisdictional issues, a ruling from the California Energy Commission (CEC), and issues related to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
5. Debrief of the September 22, 2022 Board Retreat (Discussion) Chair DeGolia shared that Peninsula Clean Energy staff did an excellent job in focusing on our two strategic goals. In the future he would like to target the discussion to draw out more strategic discussion from the Board. Chair DeGolia would like to see more time for Board Members to discuss the potential ability to influence and educate other load-serving entities on the 24x7 goal and the possibilities around decarbonization. He suggests possibly spending more time on these goals throughout the year or getting staff reports earlier to have a more strategic discussion.
Director Parmer-Lohan noted that it was a heavy lift to determine feasibility of decarbonization by 2035 and believes the next step would be to drill down on certain areas of that goal and determine where Peninsula Clean Energy has control versus where they don’t. Director Parmer-Lohan noted that it is difficult to share ideas in a virtual format and hopes for an in-person meeting next year.
Item No. 2
Director Bonilla noted that the retreat went really well and agrees that an in-person meeting would be better. Director Bonilla noted the importance of a one-stop-shop for electrification and reach-code information.
Director Aalfs noted that staff spends a lot of time focusing on the areas that make sense to target for decarbonization including discussions with the subcommittee and other smaller groups. Director Aalfs added that it is difficult to have a meaningful strategic discussion with such a large Board and that the retreat did a good job of updating the Board on current status, but if Board Members want to get more involved, participation in the smaller meeting groups or some other format would be beneficial.
Director Hale noted that she feels good about where Peninsula Clean Energy is in terms of the adopted strategic plan. Director Hale added that Redwood City will be working on another round of reach codes, and that Peninsula Clean Energy should continue to be the backbone of information for cities as they continue advancing these goals.
Director Pine noted that while the retreat was well done, the 24x7 presentation with the heavy dive into the modeling approaches was difficult to take in.
Vice Chair Colson noted that staff did a great job with the presentations and agreed with Director Aalfs that the hard work must occur in smaller working groups. Vice Chair Colson believes the retreat is a great way to showcase the work Peninsula Clean Energy has been doing, check-in against benchmarks, and self-reflect. She added that if these things can be accomplished while also creating a benchmark from which to move forward, then the retreat is valuable. Vice Chair Colson agreed with Director Pine that the high level or detail is difficult. Vice Chair Colson would like to more formally invite partners to attend the retreat to get a read out on Peninsula Clean Energy’s progress including organizations such as Thrive, Sustainable San Mateo County or OneShoreline, and city managers, and green initiative leaders of the cities. Vice Chair Colson believe it is important for Jan to make presentations at the cities, but this is a great way for the community to come together to learn what Peninsula Clean Energy has been doing.
Director Mates noted that the retreat presentation could be used as a tool for new Board Members or refreshing Board Members with different levels of understanding.
Director Bonilla added that more should be said about the efforts taken to avoid blackouts during the September 2022 heat storm, especially as there is pushback from people on the reliability of the electrical system.
Director Emeritus Keener agreed with Director Pine that the level of detail was too high and, in the future, helping new Board Members draw conclusions instead of showing all the work may be the way to go.
6. Preview of Peninsula Clean Energy Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) (Discussion) Sara Maatta, Senior Renewable Energy and Compliance Analyst, gave a presentation on the Peninsula Clean Energy Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) including regulatory background, assigned greenhouse gas emissions targets, the timing of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) process, the CPUC preferred system plan for 2021, and the 2022-2023 filing requirements. She also explained how we used our 24x7 analysis approach for this year’s IRP submission, as well as the Item No. 2
sections on community outreach, and Peninsula Clean Energy’s modeling approach and results.
Director Emeritus Gupta asked if high EV adoption and low building electrification would change the volume in the forecast that would cause higher load? Sara explained that yes, the IRP load forecasts that we are required to use in this filing for these measures are lower than what we eventually expect.
Chair DeGolia asked about San Mateo County’s rooftop solar adoption in comparison to the state. Sara explained that most solar additions come from new construction, and in San Mateo County the land area that has been developed will go up and not out, which will not add new rooftop area.
Director Emeritus Gupta asked for further clarification on why the geothermal portfolio is decreasing to 49 MW in 2035 compared to 2030. Sara explained that Peninsula Clean Energy is projecting to add geothermal projects to the portfolio through 2026 with the Geysers project ending in 2032, and that by 2035 offshore wind is predicted to be a better fit and more cost effective than adding more geothermal.
Director Aalfs asked how Peninsula Clean Energy’s IRP looks in comparison to other Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs) and if Peninsula Clean Energy is setting a different goal for themselves that get reflected in the IRP document. Sara explained that in 2020 the 24x7 goal was not incorporated but there was good feedback from the CPUC on Peninsula Clean Energy’s modeling approach and analysis, and that there is hope for similar feedback this year.
Chair DeGolia asked why large hydro is not shown on the graphs. Sara explained in 2024 there will be large hydro in the portfolio procuring under an energy only contract structure which is why it is not displayed on slide 34 of the presentation.
Director Emeritus Keener asked where natural gas power is shown on the Preferred System Plans. Sara explained that she would need to double check but believes that SB 100 resources could be shown and that natural gas resources are being reserved for load that is outside the scope of SB 100.
Director Emeritus Gupta asked for a summary on what role demand side planning has played in the IRP. Sara explained that the 24x7 analysis looked at the demand side but that it was a little early to model because there is a lack of data, so for this IRP model demand response programs were not included. Sara added that once there is more data on those programs then future IRPs will include that data.
7. Update on GovPV Solar + Storage Program (Discussion) Dave Fribush, Distributed Energy Resources Consultant, gave a presentation with an update on the GovPV Solar + Storage Program including information on the Inflation Reduction Act and direct pay, installation procurement update, key details on the EPC contract, information on customer PPA details, and a projected timeline.
Chair DeGolia asked about delay schedules for cities without complications. Dave explained that cities without complications would move forward.
Public Comment: Dave Mauro
Item No. 2
8. Discussion on Return to In-Person Meetings (Discussion) Jennifer Stalzer, Associate General Counsel, explained that at this point there is not an expiration on remote meetings as long as there is a continued state of emergency pursuant to AB 361. The current rules remain in effect until January 2024 unless the State of Emergency expires or is ended by the Governor prior to that date. Jen explained that this does not prevent the organization from moving forward with plans to reconvene in person meetings or hybrid – partially remote, partially in-person – meetings.
Chair DeGolia clarified that a decision needs to come from the state level. Chair DeGolia also added that staff felt that the conference room at 2075 Woodside Road did not have a sufficient amount of space.
Jan Pepper, Chief Executive Officer, explained that the Executive Committee and Audit and Finance Committee would be able to have hybrid meetings at 2075 Woodside Road, and that the room has technology to accomplish that. However, Jan noted there are 29 participants at today’s Executive Committee and if everyone were in person, this group would be too large for the current meeting room. Jan explained that a space has been identified at the Office of Emergency Services at San Mateo County center to potentially hold Peninsula Clean Energy Board Meetings.
Director Pine explained that a new regional operations center was built that includes a meeting room with hybrid technology in Redwood City.
Director Bonilla noted that in-person meetings would be optimal although he would continue to wear a mask. Director Bonilla also added that having a hybrid choice is valuable and we should explore it.
Jennifer noted that the Peninsula Clean Energy Board semi-mirrors the Board of Supervisors and they are currently in a hybrid mode. Jennifer also noted that the State of Emergency could theoretically end at any time and Peninsula Clean Energy should come up with a plan to not be caught off guard in the future.
Vice Chair Colson added that she appreciates how many people show up on Zoom, and how efficient and green it is. Vice Chair Colson noted that she is amenable to a hybrid solution but would be sad if participation falls, as she enjoys hearing from and seeing everyone.
Chair DeGolia added that a hybrid format is very important and has increased attendance and noted that many participants would join online in hybrid format with a guess of having less than 10 in-person. Chair DeGolia noted that many people join online and there will be a serious disappointment if meetings aren’t able to continue in a hybrid format.
9. Committee Members’ Reports
Director Medina shared that reach codes were adopted in San Bruno.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 11:47 a.m.