P R E P A R E D B Y G D S A S S O C I A T E S , I N C .
CITY OF
FONTANA
R F P C M - 24- 167 - SP
Proposal for Community Choice
Aggregation (CCA) Formation
and Operation, Revision 1
August 7, 2024
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C i
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
1 QUALIFICATIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 1
1.1 Turnkey CCA Team Approach............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Further GDS Qualifications and Relevant Experience ........................................................................................................ 3
1.3 Past Clients with References .............................................................................................................................................. 5
1.4 Past Experience .................................................................................................................................................................. 6
1.5 Project Management ......................................................................................................................................................... 8
1.6 Key Personnel ................................................................................................................................................................... 11
1.7 Turnkey Team Management ............................................................................................................................................ 17
1.8 Financial Capability .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 2 ADDITIONAL PROPOSAL CONTENT ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 19
2.1 Narrative .......................................................................................................................................................................... 19
2.2 Gantt Chart....................................................................................................................................................................... 30
2.3 Cost of Services ................................................................................................................................................................ 32 3 VALUE ADDED SERVICES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 37
3.1 Assistance to Help Residential, Commercial and Industrial Customers – City CCA Public Image .................................... 37
3.2 Bringing New Power Generation, Storage or Distribution to the City ............................................................................. 37
3.3 Regional CCA Development ............................................................................................................................................. 38
3.4 Electric System Grid Reliability Programs Participation ................................................................................................... 38
3.5 Participation in SCE Regulatory Proceedings ................................................................................................................... 38
3.6 Economic Impacts ............................................................................................................................................................ 38 APPENDIX A. CORPORATE BIOGRAPHIES OF TURNKEY CCA TEAM ................................ ................................ ... A APPENDIX B. RESUMES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... B APPENDIX C. FINANCIAL INFORMATION ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. C
Kevin J. Mara, Executive Vice President
[email protected]
phone (678) 488 -4691
fax 866-611-3791
1850 Parkway Place ◼ Suite 800 ◼ Marietta, GA 30067 ◼ 770-425-8100 ◼ Fax 866 -611-3791 ◼ gdsassociates.com G e o r g i a ◼ Te x a s ◼ A l a b a m a ◼ N e w H a m p s h i r e ◼ W i s c o n s i n ◼ F l o r i d a ◼ M a i n e ◼ W a s h i n g t o n ◼ C a l i f o r n i a August 7, 2024
Mr. Sid Lambert
Purchasing Manager
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, California 92335
Subject: Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation (RFP CM-24-167-SP) – REVISION 1
Dear Mr. Lambert:
GDS Associates , Inc. (“GDS”) is pleased to submit the enclosed Request for Proposal to the City of Fontana (“City”) for Community Choice Aggregation (“CCA”) Formation and Operation, Revision 1. Revision 1 includes changes suggested by City staff. GDS has professional staff members with energy industry backgrounds in the areas of: economics, finance, financial analysis, engineering, design, public administration, operations, research, environmental, permitting, general utility management and regulation.
GDS is a multidisciplinary management consulting and registered professional engineering firm that provides a variety of project solutions to clients involved with electric power, natural gas, telecommunications, water, wastewater and other energy and natural resource related businesses. EES Consulting, a GDS Associates Company, is an industry leader in evaluating and implementing CCAs throughout California having provided CCA-related services for half of the jurisdictions now participating in CCAs throughout all Investor-Owned Utility territories.
As described throughout this proposal, we specifically offer a Turnkey CCA solution to the City in meeting its community energy objectives primarily through the investigation and, if financially feasible, the implementation and operation of a CCA program. As a CCA, the City can provide lower electricity rates to its constituents, offer local decision-making regarding power supplies and setting of rates, develop local energy programs for customers, and create a revenue stream and net positive financial position to support City-determined energy objectives and projects. The City will also have access to local government clean energy funding and an energy partner with the expertise and resources to access funding and support strategic energy initiatives.
Our offer also states that the GDS Team will conduct a CCA feasibility study for the City at no cost regardless of the City’s decision to move forward with a CCA or not. If CCA is determined to be financially viable and the City decides to move forward, GDS will identify options for initiating and implementing an operational CCA with the GDS Team. After the feasibility study is complete and vetted, the County and potentially other cities will decide whether or not to proceed to next steps in CCA formation. The County and other cities are not expected to expend any costs up through the feasibility study.
We have assembled an unmatched team of utility industry service providers who can implement and operate a CCA for the City with, if desired, no designated roles for the City except to provide governance leadership for the CCA. Alternatively, any desired City roles within a CCA may be developed within our CCA operations structure. 1850 Parkway Place ◼ Suite 800 ◼ Marietta, GA 30067 ◼ 770-425-8100 ◼ Fax 866 -611-3791 ◼ gdsassociates.com G e o r g i a ◼ Te x a s ◼ A l a b a m a ◼ N e w H a m p s h i r e ◼ W i s c o n s i n ◼ F l o r i d a ◼ M a i n e ◼ W a s h i n g t o n ◼ C a l i f o r n i a GDS’ California Secretary of State Entity No. is 2673636. The contact person during the period of the proposal evaluation will be:
Howard Choy, Executive Consultant
850 Iron Point Road, Suite 154
Folsom, California 95630
(323) 204-6134 / [email protected]
We look forward to working with the City on this exciting project, are available for any questions, and hope to hear back from you soon.
Sincerely,
Kevin J. Mara, P.E.
Executive Vice President
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 1
1 Qualifications
Founded in 1986, GDS Associates, Inc. ( “GDS”) provides engineering and consulting services to electric utility clients across the country, covering a broad range of services in the areas of wholesale and retail rates, cost of service (“COS”), demand-side management, power supply planning, financial consulting, transmission planning, access and pricing, generation development and monitoring, operational and management challenges, and many others.
Local governments, cooperatives, municipal systems, and regulatory agencies are GDS’ target clients, and we gear our business toward being able to provide the multitude of services that those entities need “all under one roof”.
We serve a diverse client base with a variety of energy consulting services, as well as information technology, market research, and statistical services.
GDS has extensive engineering, rate, regulatory, compliance, and expert testimony experience. GDS senior staff members are recognized leaders in their fields, dedicated to their clients, and innovative in their approach to delivering quality consulting services that satisfy client needs. EES Consulting (“EES”), a GDS Associates company, has significant experience in the CCA community. EES has previously prepared CCA Feasibility Analyses, Business Plans, and/or Implementation Plans for dozens of California jurisdictions evaluating or implementing CCA programs. EES/GDS has offices in Re dmond, WA; Folsom, CA; and Camarillo; CA and can be readily available for any in-person activities.
1.1 TURNKEY CCA TEAM APPROACH
For this proposal, GDS has assembled a highly qualified, experienced team of CCA and utility service providers to meet the objectives of the City with other cities (“Cities”). Based on our CCA experience, a Turnkey approach saves money, time and confusion in investigating and deciding on CCA. The Turnkey approach lays out all steps necessary to evaluate and determine a path forward for the City. It also leaves the Turnkey Team responsible for assembling and hiring all the needed service providers and resources to implement a CCA. Lastly, our Turnkey Team, as their corporate profiles and resumes indicate, have unmatched backgrounds and experience working with CCAs and in the energy industry.
Figure 1-1 illustrates the Turnkey Team members and their roles. Further detail on these roles and each Team member’s qualifications are provided in the Narrative and Turnkey Team Company Profiles.
GDS will be the prime contractor to any city or Joint Powers Authority requesting a feasibility study and CCA start- up, implementation and operations. As such, GDS will provide all administrative and program management functions including all customer coordination and service.
The GDS team will conduct the CCA Feasibility Study and provide all services to prepare and present the study results for City electeds, executives and community input and/or approvals. GDS will also, if directed by the City, proceed to implement the CCA. Those steps are described in more detail in the Narrative section.
GDS will conduct power supply planning and procurement for the CCA based on GDS’ extensive experience conducting the same for public and private entities throughout the Country. GDS can analyze and procure power from wholesale power markets, independent power producers and from local/regional power sources. GDS also develops risk management strategies for power procurement to mitigate potential changing market and CCA operating conditions. Additional Turnkey Team members and their roles are described identi fied below and described in greater detail throughout this proposal.
Tenaska Power Services (“Tenaska”) will serve as the CCA Schedule/Dispatch function which involves coordinating the delivery of CCA -purchased power into and out of the transmission grids throughout California C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 2
and the western U.S., as appropriate, and ultimately into Southern CA Edison’s distribution grid for delivery to CCA customers.
Calpine Energy Solutions (“Calpine”) will perform bill data management coordination between the CCA and SCE.
This role i s necessary because SCE, through its current billing program, collects the CCA customer electricity revenues and customer bill data. Retail revenues are delivered to the CCA to pay operating costs, largely the power provider, and staff and administrative costs. Calpine will also provide a CCA customer call center with scope of operations determined by CA Public Utilities regulations and the CCA.
The Energy Coalition (“TEC”) runs public agency energy programs throughout southern California funded by state regulatory agencies such as the CA Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”) and the CA Energy Commission (CEC). TEC can acquire CPUC allocated energy efficiency program funding provided for CCAs and can acquire local government energy grant funding from federal and state agencies. TEC also provides customer -facing marketing and information outreach venues including CCA websites and customer notifications.
Best Best & Krieger (“BBK”) will provide CA regulatory legal services for the CCA and can serve as in-house counsel if desired. We note that BBK already serves as City Attorney for the City and the City should determine whether BBK legal services in support of the CCA would be done under the Turnkey Team or directly through the existing City arrangement with BBK.
AAdvantage Communications will provide customer service support on behalf of the Turnkey Team to the City or cities. They will also participate and develop strategies for adding additional cities to the CCA, if desired; gaining public or other community stakeholder support for the CCA; and representing the CCA in state issues (regulatory, legislative and advocacy) with other CCAs or solely for this CCA.
FIGURE 1-1. TURN KE Y C CA TE AM AN D ROLE S
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 3
1.2 FURTHER GDS QUALIFICATIONS AND RELEVANT EXPERIENCE GDS’ range of public agency utility industry and CCA clients, and the services provided, are shown in Table 1-1 and Table 1-2 below and represent our qualifications and expertise relative to this scope of work and the utility operations industry. Our Turnkey Team member qualifications are described in more detail in Appendices A and B. Further detail on specific CCA client projects, with references, is provided in the next section of this proposal.
Our experience and available resources make the GDS Turnkey Team exceptionally and uniquely qualified to carry out the full range of administrative, technical and management services required of this scope.
TAB LE 1-1. G DS 1 LIST OF CLIENTS FOR PR OVISION OF UTILITY OPER ATIONS ASSE SSMEN T Client System Reason for Assessment
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative Teller Electric System Purchase Alaska Power & Telephone Army Garrison – Hawaii (Oahu) Privatization Alaska Power & Telephone Joint Base Lewis-McChord Privatization Anchorage Municipal Light & Power Elmendorf AFB Electric Facilities / Various Purchase Black River Electric Cooperative Fort Jackson Privatization Bradford Municipal Electric Distribution Facilities Sale CHELCO Eglin AFB Privatization
City of Alexandria Utilities City’s Utility Systems Valuation City of Cerritos Generation Facility Purchase
City of Corona Southern Cal Edison Condemnation
City of Heyburn Electric Distribution Facilities Sale
City of Indian Wells Southern Cal Edison Condemnation
City of Irvine Southern Cal Edison Purchase
City of Lethbridge Electric Distribution Facilities Sale City of Medicine Hat Generation Facility Purchase
City of Port Angeles Electric Distribution Facilities Purchase City of Richland Electric Distribution Facilities Purchase City of Richland/Benton REA Electric Distribution Facilities Purchase/Sale City of San Marcos Generation Facility Purchase
City of Toppenish PacifiCorp Distribution Facilities Condemnation City of Winnetka Coal Plant Purchase
Clark Public Utilities Northwest Natural Gas Distribution Facilities Purchase Columbia River PUD PacifiCorp Distribution Facilities Condemnation Douglas County PUD Wells Dam Federal Court Dispute
Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina Large Municipal System Acquisition Electric Distribution Association of Ontario Various Purchase Emerald PUD North Umpqua Hydro Facility Condemnation
Flathead Electric Cooperative PacifiCorp Distribution Facilities Purchase Flathead Electric Cooperative Deseret G&T Generation Purchase Flathead Electric Cooperative Elk Basin Distribution Facilities Sale Grays Harbor PUD/City of McCleary Electric Distribution Facilities Purchase/Sale Gulf Coast Electric Cooperative Tyndall AFB Privatization G&K, Inc. Cold Bay Electric System Sale
Idaho Coops PacifiCorp Distribution Facilities Purchase Laclede Electric Mt. Pleasant Municipal Utility Acquisition
1 Note that some projects were completed under the EES business name.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 4
Client System Reason for Assessment
Large Public Agency Coops PacifiCorp Distribution Purchase Large Public Agency Coops PGE Distribution Purchase
Lewis County PUD/City of Centralia Electric Distribution Facilities Purchase/Sale Lower Valley Power & Light Fall River Electric Distribution Facilities Purchase Mani Ventures Generation Facility Purchase
TAB LE 1-2. G DS 2 LIST OF CLIENTS FOR PR OVISION OF C C A SE RVICE S Client/Location Services Provided
Loudon County, VA CCA Feasibility Study
Los Angeles County (CA) - (County of Los Angeles and
All Eligible Cities within the County)
Technical Feasibility Study, Additional Services Under Clean Power Alliance – the JPA that grew out of the Los Angeles County CCA initial formation.
County of San Diego, CA Technical Feasibility Study, Renewable Resource Supply Assessment
City of San Diego, Solana Energy Alliance, and
King City (CA) Peer Review of Technical Feasibility Studies Cities of Chula Vista, Encinitas, La Mesa, Santee,
Escondido, Vista, San Marcos, Oceanside, Carlsbad,
Del Mar (CA)
Three Separate Technical Feasibility Studies for Various City Groups
Nevada Irrigation District (CA) Technical Feasibility Study South San Joaquin Irrigation District (CA) Technical Feasibility Study Western Riverside Council of Governments, San
Bernadino Association of Governments, Coachella
Valley Association of Governments (CA)
Technical Feasibility Study
Orange County Poer Authority (CA) – (Cities of Irvine,
Huntington Beach, Fullerton and Buena Park,
County of Orange)
Technical Feasibility Study (City of Irvine), Implementation Plan, Implementation Plan Amendment, Regulatory Filings, Start-Up Support
Central Coast Community Energy (CA) - (Counties of
San Benito, Santa Cruz, Monterey, Santa Barbara and
cities within the Counties, and cities within the County of San Luis Obispo)
Cost of Service and Rate Design
Butte Choice Energy (CA) – (County of Butte,
Cities of Chico, Oroville)
Technical Feasibility Study, Implementation Plan,
Start-Up Support
Clean Power Alliance (CA) – (Counties of Los Angeles
and Ventura, Multiple Cities Within the Counties
Technical Feasibility Study, Implementation Plan,
Start-Up Activities, Public Outreach
San Jose Clean Energy (CA) – (City of San Jose) Technical Feasibility Study, GHG Reductions Analysis, Governance and Partnership Options
Silicon Valley Clean Energy (CA) – (County of Santa
Clara and Cities Within the County) Rate Setting Analysis East Bay Community Energy (CA) – (County of
Alameda, City of Oakland)
Technical Feasibility Study, Implementation Plan,
Start-Up Services
Western Community Energy (CA) – (County of
Riverside and Cities Within the County)
Start-Up Services, Rate Setting, Regulatory Assistance, Integrated Resource Plan
City of Pueblo (CO) Public Power Municipalization Study and Assessment of CCA in the State Legislature
2 Note that some projects were completed under the EES business name.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 5
1.3 PAST CLIENTS WITH REFERENCES
Below are engagements for our recent, and significant, work in developing CCAs in California with references noted.
Project Name / Client CCA Feasibility / City of Irvine
Client Contact Name & Title Oliver Chi, City Manager
Phone (949) 724-6246 Email [email protected]
Project Description
EES finalized the City’s feasibility study in January 2020 after updating previous analyses using the annual Edison rate changes published in late 2019. The Irvine study included the same technical rigor of other EES studies and was peer reviewed in April 2020. The peer review emboldened the City to move forward with coordinating a County-wide CCA effort under which GDS continued development of a regional CCA. The Orange County Power Author ity (OCPA) JPA which now includes the cities of Irvine, Fullerton, Buena Park, Huntington Beach and unincorporated Orange County. Additional Orange County cities are currently considering joining this JPA. Additionally, in 2023, EES provided an operational assessment of the OCPA on behalf of Irvine.
Project Team Garrett Cole, Howard Choy, Amber Gschwend, Ryan Baron (BBK)
Project Name / Client CCA Feasibility / Cities of Vista, Escondido, and San Marcos Client Contact Name & Title John Conley, Director of Community Development/Engineering Phone (760) 643-5388 Email [email protected]
Project Description
EES completed a feasibility study in 2020 for these three cities combined and individually. Ultimately, all three cities decided to join the Clean Energy Alliance CCA which includes the cities of: Solana Beach, Oceanside, Carlsbad and Del Mar.
The is finishing up a technical feasibility study for these three cities.
Project Team Howard Choy, Amber Gschwend, Garrett Cole
Project Name / Client CCA Feasibility and Implementation Services/ Butte Choice Energy (BCE) Client Contact Name & Title Brian Ring, Interim Executive Director Phone (530) 552-3311 Email [email protected]
Project Description
EES prepared the feasibility analysis for BCE in 2018 and continued to support the County and the City of Chico as they formed a Joint Powers Authority (BCE) in 2019 and began the implementation process in 2020. The feasibility study included many of the same elements requested by Tuolumne County including economic impacts, rate forecasts, load forecasts, financial feasibility, and governance. BCE is currently waiting to proceed with launch until key feasibility metrics around PG&E rates and PCIA are settled.
Project Team Garrett Cole, Howard Choy, Amber Gschwend, Ryan Baron (BBK)
Project Name / Client CCA Feasibility/ County of San Diego Client Contact Name & Title Charley Marchesano, Chief, Energy and Sustainability Program Phone (858) 699-3502 Email [email protected] Project Description
EES prepared a CCA feasibility analysis and Business Plan for the County of San Diego in 2021. Additionally, the team has assisted the County in its analysis of regional, renewable energy potential as a supply resource for future CCAs and a market assessment of the value of energy from local renewable resources. GDS continued assisting the County in evaluating its options for creating its own CCA or joining with other, existing CCAs. Ultima tely the County joined San Diego Community Power which includes the cities of: San Diego, Chula Vista, and Encinitas.
Project Team Howard Choy, Amber Gschwend
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 6
Project Name / Client CCA Feasibility, Implementation, Start-up/ County of Los Angeles Client Contact Name & Title Bill Carnahan, ex-interim Executive Director Phone (626) 487-5356 Email [email protected] Project Description
EES prepared a CCA feasibility analysis and Business Plan for the County of Los Angeles in 2016; the analysis included all eligible cities within the County. Subsequently, EES assisted the County team, including an interim Executive Director, in forming the CCA through municipal action, complying with regulatory and legal requirements, creating the JPA governance body, investigating start -up and operations financing, assisting with outreach to eligible cities, and hiring of CCA service providers, and providing initial operations consulting support.
Project Team Howard Choy (County employee), Amber Gschwend
Project Name / Client CCA Feasibility/ Cities of Chula Vista, La Mesa, Santee Client Contact Name & Title Corey Downs, Conservation Specialist, City of Chula Vista Phone (619) 476-2442 Email [email protected]
Project Description
EES prepared a CCA feasibility analysis for the three cities in 2019. EES presented the study and results to several committees and to each City Council. The study evaluated feasibility from a 3-city JPA perspective as well as for individual City-CCAs. The results of the feasibility study were relied on as each City chose its path to move forward with CCA implementation. The Cities of Chula Vista and La Mesa joined the City of San Diego and othe r cities to form San Diego Community Power. The City of Santee is considering joining the County of San Diego to form another CCA JPA.
Project Team Howard Choy, Amber Gschwend
Project Name / Client CCA Feasibility/ Loudon County, Virginia Client Contact Name & Title Dennis Cumbie, Programs Division Manager Phone (703) 737-8699 Email [email protected]
Project Description
To better understand the benefits and risks associated with municipal aggregation programs, Loudoun County (County) selected GDS Associates, Inc. (GDS) and Best, Best & Krieger (BB&K) to prepare this Study that assesses the technical and financial feasibil ity of municipal aggregation as a mechanism to provide choice to customers, potentially lower their electricity rates, and contribute toward achieving the County’s greenhouse gas reduction goals. This Study relies on information taken from previous aggregation attempts within the Commonwealth, the incumbent IOU rates and portfolio mix, and municipal aggregation programs operating in other parts of the country.
Project Team Garrett Cole, Amber Gschwend, Ryan Baron
1.4 PAST EXPERIENCE
1.4.1 Scope of Work Specific to CCA Feasibility
Table 1-3 below describes the typical scope of work and content provided by GDS for numerous CCA clients described earlier. The development of this now industry-standard scope of work has been refined and improved throughout GDS’ tenure in providing CCA evaluation, assessment and feasibility support. As indicated in this table, we highlight where the customer, the City or Cities, play a significant role in providing input to guide the analysis.
TAB LE 1-3. STAN DAR D SCOPE AN D CON TEN T PR OVIDE D IN C CA FE ASIB ILITY STUDY CCA Study Input Scope of Work Comments
CCA Load
Analysis, Study
and Forecast
Historic load request and analysis by customer class: residential, commercial, industrial, other. Forecast load growth scenarios.
Develop energy and peak demand forecasts to inform power supply cost estimates and revenue projections.
The City would execute
documents from SCE releasing
City energy consumption data
and following non-disclosure
agreement language on
retaining the data.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 7
CCA Study Input Scope of Work Comments
Rate Analysis
Develop retail rate forecasts for CCA program,
delivery/distribution costs for SCE wires infrastructure, and generation cost stranding. A discussion of how rate structure impacts CCA customer savings will also be included in the analysis. Unique to GDS, our staff are rate experts in the public utility arena completing cost of service and rate design analyses for dozens of public electric utilities and CCAs every year.
We will work with the City to
determine rate requirements;
i.e., equal to or % lower than
SCE and impacts on operating
revenues.
CCA Energy
Procurement
The CCA power portfolio will consider options for meeting any City clean energy goals; i.e., percent of renewable power supply to the City.
A range of forecast costs will be
analyzed.
CCA Feasibility
Sensitivity
Analysis
A sensitivity analysis will be performed for the following key variables:
– Range of market prices for conventional and renewable energy including impacts of tax credit changes;
– Ranges of SCE generation rates, exit fees, and customer surcharges; – Rate sensitivity to the inclusion of renewable energy resources at levels that exceed the state RPS;
– Rate sensitivity to the inclusion of local renewable generation and DERs;
– Extent to which rates may change depending on varying levels of participation and resulting lowest feasible participation rate; – Opt-out or opt-in rate impact on base level of renewable resource mix offered;
– Identification of any anomalies, either challenges or opportunities, in the service area related to geographic, demographic, COVID-19, or economic circumstances.
Our Team will examine each
portfolio option under a range of
conditions to ensure that the
recommended resource plan is
appropriate under unexpected
market and regulatory
conditions. This will be
thoroughly vetted with the City.
CCA Proforma
Analysis
Develop a 10-year financial model pro-forma with cash flow analysis. These costs will include start-up costs, any required CCA surety bonds, cost of capital, data management, staffing, customer service, legal services, uncollected accounts, payments to SCE for stranded generation costs, marketing, accounting, and all power procurement costs such as scheduling, transmission, and surcharges. Based on these expenses, our project team will estimate the total CCA revenue requirement and resulting unit costs for 10-years of operation.
These operating costs will be
based on the operating costs of
existing CCAs and scaled for the
size of the City’s program.
CCA Risk
Analysis
GDS will evaluate and report on a range of risks and risk mitigation strategies associated with CCA formation and operation. The analysis will address challenges faced by existing CCAs, as well as those anticipated for new CCAs over the next 10 years. For each risk category, our study will describe causes, effects, potential impact, likelihood of occurrence, and strategies to mitigate them. Based on the results of this analysis, risks can then be anticipated and addressed through changes in program policy, contract terms, insurance, financing, and modification of management practices.
The City may also advise on
specific risks to be addressed.
Public Benefits
Program
GDS will review current expenses for special programs such as low-income support, energy efficiency, or other special programs. We will also report on existing CCA-only public benefit programs – especially available in California.
The City may also advise on
desirability of accessing these
and other available programs.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 8
1.4.2 Additional Work Experience for GDS Specific to Utility Operations The following summarizes additional examples of work performed for clients for whom GDS have completed recent merger and acquisition evaluations, feasibility studies or other similarly related utility industry work. More specifically, GDS is known for completing utility transactions and not just studying them. The following list represents some of those transactions that were completed and are underway today:
Transfer of PacifiCorp Montana assets to Flathead Electric Cooperative. Value of approximately $100 million in assets.
Set up public utility in Southern California Edison service territory for Moreno Valley, California. Utility value of approximately $75 million in assets.
Set up public utility in Southern California Edison service territory for City of Corona, California. Utility value of approximately $50 million.
Acquisition of Sierra Pacific’s water assets by the Cities of Reno and Sparks (Truckee Meadows Water Authority). Approximate asset value of $450 million.
Negotiated contract for Nor-Cal JPA to purchase PacifiCorp’s California retail service area. Utility valuation of $400 million.
Assisted Hydro One of Ontario in purchasing Avista Corp Assets valued at $500 million. Valuation study including separation plan and reintegration plan for the formation of an electric utility at Bloomfield, New Mexico.
Privatization of Eglin Air Force Base’s Electric Utility Grid to a Public Power Operator via a 50-Year Contract. Completion of the first Intergovernmental Service Agreement for utility services whereby operational control and responsibility for all infrastructure associated with the Army installation’s electric, water and natural gas infrastructure was transferred to a local municipal utility. Valuation of all of the U.S. Navy’s utility assets in southern California. This valuation included inventory, aging, and quality review of the assets at more than 25 installations. Valuation of electric system at White Sands Missile Range. This valuation included inventory, aging, and quality review of the assets at more than 25 installations.
Valuation of electric system at U.S. Army Yuma Proving Grounds. This valuation included inventory, aging, and quality review of the assets at more than 25 installations.
In all these transactions, GDS completed the financial, engineering and operations due diligence, developed the bid document, negotiated the purchase contract, provided the expert opinion for the utility negotiation, wrote the engineering letter for the necessary project financing, and other activities to complete the project transaction.
1.4.3 Work Experience for Other Turnkey CCA Team Members Work experience and capabilities for our other Turnkey CCA Team Members are provided in Appendices A and B.
1.5 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
The following sections describe the GDS Team Project Management approach and standard for various parts of this project scope: the CCA Feasibility Study (including interaction with the City), the overall Program Management including starting-up and operating the CCA, and the organization of the Turnkey CCA Team. Figure 1-2 at the end of this section ill ustrates the benefits of a centrally managed, turnkey CCA effort. The Project Manager will be Howard Choy and will serve as the individual responsible for managing overall work assignment communications and project activities’ status to the City and will serve as the principal point of contact for all City communications with The Turnkey Team.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 9
1.5.1 CCA Feasibility Study Management/Communication
Throughout the Feasibility Study process, the Project Manager will check -in regularly (as desired by the City, typically every two weeks) with staff from the City to provide updates, solicit feedback, and ensure City expectations are fulfilled. GDS, the Feasibility Study author, will document all methods and assumptions used in the analysis and provide the City with its analytical modeling tools to ensure that the City is comfortable with the model inputs and results. A draft study will be provided to the c ity for review at least three weeks before the agreed on final study submission date. The Feasibility Study team will then be available to present the study to staff, City councils, or community groups as needed by the City.
Specific parts of the Feasibility Study development involving City input, approval or review are identified in Table 1-3 – Standard Scope and Content Provided in CCA Feasibility Study.
The Feasibility Study Team will implement the following strict quality control procedures for all data collection and development efforts throughout the project:
For all data sources the Team will look at look at how the data was developed (e.g., primary or secondary research), documentation of sources, sample size (if primary data) and implied sample accuracy, the background and reputation of the source, and any identified data quality procedures. All data will be reviewed and approved by a senior consultant during the data development process before the data is deemed appropriate.
Any model input data will be presented to City staff for review, comments, and approval. For economic modelling, outputs will be reviewed by senior staff for reasonableness by looking at detailed breakdowns of energy efficiency potential and cost-effectiveness by end-use. All revised model input data will be presented to City staff for review and approval.
These steps will ensure that more than one Feasibility Study Team member is involved in collecting and analyzing any data, which will in turn lead to sound estimates and credible reports. All major deliverables will be processed through our dedicated editor for technical accuracy and to aid in the presentation of information.
1.5.2 CCA Planning And Start Up , Operations
GDS will oversee all aspects of the project, including management of all Turnkey Team member functions within the scope of work and submission of all deliverables. Management of the project is designed to deliver high - quality, on -time, on -budget (where applicable) services to the City. Howard Choy will communicate with designated City staff on a regular basis as to the progress of the work, the results to date and any problems encountered. The GDS Turnkey Team will anticipate weekly (or as needed and prefer red) in person and/or teleconferences with City staff to discuss work assignments, meetings, and deliverables for the coming week. GDS Turnkey Team members will report any delays or unforeseen difficulties to the GDS project manager and the City staff if such delays or difficulties develop.
1. GDS will maintain and administer a SharePoint site to facilitate the exchange of data and documents with the City staff.
2. The Turnkey Team will provide City staff with drafts of all major deliverables for review, comment, and approval (if desired). These deliverables will have already received several rounds of peer editing by Turnkey Team support staff and principals.
3. At the beginning of the project, the key personnel of the Turnkey Team will attend the kick -off meeting with City staff to review the work plans, proposed methodological approaches, the project schedules, and the format for all project deliverables.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 10
4. GDS will provide written monthly, or as often as required, project status reports to the City, summarizing project status by activity and identifying any difficulties or delays, and recommending corrective action, as needed.
5. GDS will prepare a comprehensive draft and final report(s) for each major task, edited, and proofread by a dedicated professional editor, providing clear and complete description of the methodology, data sources, assumptions, results, references, and any other information relevant to the work.
In addition to the controls detailed above, the GDS Turnkey Team will make use of total quality management tools (where appropriate) such as monthly timelines, monthly work schedules, budget variance reports, and "percent work task completed" reports to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of project management and to keep the project on-schedule. Additionally, all deliverables will be subject to internal team quality review, before being submitted to the client. The GDS project manager will be responsible for ensuring the quality of all project reports and memos.
1.5.3 CCA Operations and Turnkey Team Management
Section 1.1, Turnkey CCA Team Approach, describes the relationship between GDS and the Turnkey Team members. GDS will serve as the sole contractor with the City and will subcontract with all service provider team members. The graphic provided earlier generally describes the Turnkey Team and their roles. More detailed descriptions of the technical roles to be conducted by the Turnkey Team is provided in Section 2.1, Narrative.
Management of the Turnkey Team by GDS is provided in Section 1.7. Figure 1-2 below summarizes the merits to the City of the Turnkey Team operations and management.
FIGURE 1-2. RELATIVE MERITS OF TURN KEY CC A SER VICES
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 11
1.6 KEY PERSONNEL
Based on the proposed scope of work listed in the RFP, GDS has selected experienced Turnkey Team consultants who have the skills and experience to complete this project on time and provide high -quality deliverables. The Turnkey Team members are presented in Table 1-4 along with the location of each consultant . As mentioned earlier, Howard Choy will be the overall Project Manager and the primary contact for this project. He will be responsible for daily contact with City staff, development of the research approaches for each Task, assigning work tasks to project team members, drafting of report findings and recommendations, and ensuring that project deliverables meet the quality requirements and expectations of the City. Resumes for all GDS Turnkey Team members are provided ed in Appendix B.
TAB LE 1-4. G DS PR OJEC T TE AM
Personnel Title Location Roles & Responsibilities
GDS ASSOCIATES, INC.
Kevin Mara Executive Vice President Marietta, GA GDS Partner Overseeing Overall Turnkey CCA Operations
Garrett Cole Principal Folsom, CA Power Supply and Procurement Implementation
Howard Choy Executive Consultant Folsom, CA Project Manager, Client Point of Contact Amber Gschwend Managing Director Redmond, WA CCA Feasibility Study, Start-Up and Regulatory Compliance
TENASKA
Carey Moris Vice President Murrieta, CA Power Scheduling and Dispatch, Risk Management, Market Operations
Kevin R. Smith President Murrieta, CA Power Scheduling and Dispatch, Risk Management, Market Operations
Curry D. Aldridge Senior Vice President Murrieta, CA Power Scheduling and Dispatch, Risk Management, Market Operations
CALPINE
Drake Welch Senior Vice President,
CCA Business Unit San Diego, CA SCE/CCA Bill Data Management and Customer Services/Outreach
Josh Brock Vice President,
CCA Operations San Diego, CA SCE/CCA Bill Data Management and Customer Services/Outreach
Paula White Vice President,
CCA Operations San Diego, CA SCE/CCA Bill Data Management and Customer Services/Outreach
THE ENERGY COALITION
Craig Perkins President and
Executive Director Irvine, California Customer Communications and Programs, Strategic Planning
Laurel Rothchild Vice President of
Programs Irvine, California Customer Programs, Communications Programs Development
BBK
Ryan Baron Partner Irvine, California Regulatory Counsel
AADVANTAGE
John Valdivia Owner San Bernardino, CA Regional Strategic Planning, Operations Support
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 12
1.6.1 GDS Associates, Inc. Staff Biographies
Kevin Mara, P.E., Executive Vice President, Kevin is the Executive Vice President of GDS Associates, Inc. and Principal Engineer of the Hi -Line Engineering Department. Mr. Mara’s main areas of expertise are distribution system planning, power system modeling and analysis, overhead and underground di stribution design. He has over 40 years of experience as a distribution engineer. Mr. Mara performed planning studies, general consulting, underground distribution design, overcurrent protection schemes, sectionalizing studies, lightning protection, and training services. In addition, Mr. Mara also has extensive knowledge and expertise in metering and distribution automation.
Mr. Mara has developed course material for seminars on overhead distribution design, underground distribution design, overcurrent protection, and National Electrical Safety Code, and the application of non -wood pole structures. In addition, he has conducted more than 80 training seminars from Florida to Alaska. More than 5,000 people have attended courses instructed by Mr. Mara.
Garrett D. Cole, P.E., Principal, has 20 years of experience in the electric utility industry. His main clientele has been municipals, cooperatives and law firms with a priority of offering utility management a broad range of skilled consulting expertise in all areas of the utility busines s model. In the last year, Garrett has personally negotiated and/or provided analysis of solar and battery storage projects recently for all of the following clients:
Central Electric Power Cooperative (SC), Central Virginia Electric Cooperative (VA), Boro ughs of Ephrata and Chambersburg (PA), Cities of Danville, Martinsville (VA), Town of Front Royal (VA), Virginia Tech Electric (VA), City Water and Light (AR), Paragould Light, Water & Cable (AR), Conway Corporation (AR) and Holy Cross Energy (CO).
He is p resently leading five (5) Solar/Storage RFP negotiations for EPC Turnkey or PPA arrangements with developers. In recent years, he has been involved in more than 25 solar and wind project evaluations – with a third of those projects including battery storag e alternatives. While focused on providing all -encompassing solutions for the needs of electric utilities, Garrett specializes in strategic supply, resource procurement and ISO/RTO market planning and analysis and has made significant contributions on strategic planning, negotiation, forecasting, asset review, regulatory and risk management issues. Mr. Cole holds a BS and MS of Industrial Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology and an MBA from Kennesaw State University. He is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Georgia.
Howard Choy, Executive Consultant has been providing executive and strategic leadership for large -scale energy projects and portfolios throughout his 30 -year career. He has spent over 30 years in the energy industry which included: development and administration of Los Angeles County’s Off ice of Sustainability, private sector consulting services for utilities and utility customers, and engineering and management projects for the County’s internal operations. Mr. Choy’s experience includes the incorporation of a wide variety of sustainability initiatives, including energy efficiency, demand response, generation and storage. His most impactful role was the creation of the Office of Sustainability for Los Angeles County, which resulted in hundreds of County pro jects, and thousands of projects among County constituents while serving as General Manager of the Office of Sustainability for Los Angeles County, and has developed cutting-edge, integrated energy/ water efficiency programs and tools for internal, Los Angeles County building operations. He directed the internal and community energy management programs for their $200 million annual budget, approximate 3,000 facilities portfolio, and municipal energy operations including automation of billing, meter and other data systems; building project evaluation programs; procurement and contracting programs; and internal and external financing protocols. He implemented systems and programs to identify, evaluate and manage the implementation of hundreds of clean energy p rojects in County facilities and locations.
Amber Gschwend, Managing Director, provides analytical expertise for GDS in support of economic and financial studies. She offers experience and knowledge to a wide range of topics related to regulated utilities. Her C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 13
background includes cost of service analysis, electric rate design, wholesale rate setting, and other power supply costs or related information. In addition to resource planning, Ms. Gschwend uses her background in econometrics and data analysis to develop load forecasts, normalize electric loads according to weather, and to develop market price forecasts. She also conducts conservation program evaluations and provides utilities with statistic ally significant results, which assist in utility program planning, data collection, and presentations. Ms. Gschwend has performed over 70 conservation potential assessment studies for electric utilities on the west coast. She has also assisted in the start -up of several Community Choice Aggregators in California. Amber has completed proforma modeling, IOU load analysis , regulatory filings, and rate setting services. In addition to resource planning, Ms.
Gschwend uses her background in econometrics and data analysis to develop load forecasts, normalize electric loads acc ording to weather, and develop market price forecasts. She also conducts conservation program evaluations and provides utilities with statistically significant results, which assist in utility program planning, data collection, and presentation. Finally, Ms. Gschwend and her staff have performed over 70 conservation potential assessment studies for electric utilities on the west coast.
1.6.2 Tenaska Staff Biographies
Carey Morris, Vice President , Origination (CAISO/WECC), Mr. Morris leads all aspects of the West Origination efforts for Tenaska Power Services Co. (TPS); with primary focus of responsibilities including: energy management, settlement services and portfolio optimization, CAISO Schedule Coordinator services, Renewable Power Supply and Resource Adequacy/Capacity Marketing, wholesale and retail load agreements, and short- and long-term transmission procurement and optimization. His primary focus is California and contiguous states with responsibilities for the following customer segments: utilities, municipals, CCAs, third-party Energy Service Providers, corporate renewable buyers, coops, IPPs, thermal and renewable generation developers, and retail/Commercial & Industrial customers.
Prior to joining TPS, he spent 13 years performing origination and trading roles with Shell Energy North America.
He has experience in West Origination since 1998, along with trading experience and has been working in the energy industry since 1987. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Finance from the University of Houston.
Kevin R. Smith, President, Mr. Smith joined TPS 1997 and is responsible for the strategic direction and management of Tenaska’s power -related trading activities. He is a member of Tenaska’s Board and serves as a member on various management committees associated with Tenaska business units.
Before being named president of TPS in 2012, Mr. Smith was Senior Vice President, responsible for directing their long-term marketing and business development activities. Prior to joining the Tenaska organization, Mr. Smith was manager of power marketing f or Delhi Energy Services, Inc., in Dallas, Texas, where he led the creation of Delhi’s power marketing business and directed that group’s activities.
Mr. Smith is involved in various industry activities, serving on the Members Committee of the Southwest Power Pool, the Board of Directors of the SERC Reliability Corporation and the Executive Committee of the Electric Power Supply Association. Mr. Smith earned a Bachelor of Science in petroleum engineering from Texas A&M University and a Master of Business Administration from the University of Dallas.
Curry D. Aldridge, Senior Vice President of Origination and Commercial Operations, Mr. Aldridge joined TPS in 2000 and is currently responsible for managing a team of power deal originators who negotiate and implement complex, structured energy sales and service agreements across the United States and Canada. He assumed this role in 2013 after years of exposure to, and building every side of, the TPS business from its infancy.
During his tenure at Tenaska Power Services, Mr. Aldridge has served roles in trading, energy management, commercial operations and origination. Highlights of his professional experience that contribute to his growing expertise in the field include signing long-term marketing and asset management structured transactions with both wholesale and retail customers in ERCOT, working as a NERC -certified System Operator from 2003 -2008, C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 14
launching Tenaska’s retail business in PJM in 2007, and heading Tenaska’s Energy Management team, which is responsible for scheduling, management and optimization activities for customers in all US power markets and coordinating internally with all interfacing departments, from 2008 until assuming his current role.
Curry Aldridge holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in Marketing from Abilene Christian University in Abilene, Texas. Mr. Aldridge also currently sits on the Board of Trustees at the K-12 classical college preparatory school, Colleyville Covenant Christian Academy located in Colleyville, TX.
1.6.3 Calpine Staff Biographies
Drake Welch, Senior Vice President, CCA Business Unit, Drake currently oversees Calpine Energy Solutions’ ISO9001:2015 certified Customer Care Department, which includes the Billing, Deal Integration, Market Settlements, Information Technology, and Community Choice Aggregation Services departments. Drake has over 20 years of utility and energy supplier experience, with a focus on customer and back-office services. Drake began his career as a Billing Specialist with San Diego Gas & Electric, where he advanced quickly, moving to Sempra Energy Information Solutions, a bill processing and rate auditing company, where he gained experience in national supplier invoicing and technical solutions during the infancy stages of energy deregulation. In 2001, Drake was promoted to Billing Manager with Sempra Energy Solutions LLC. Drake transformed the Billing Department, successfully managing the department through significant growth and complex invoicing requirements by excellent management, staffing, processes, controls, and technology. He has gained responsibilities over time, applying his successful technical and management approach which has resulted in lower costs, higher output, and higher quality of product.
Paula White, Vice President, CCA Operations, Paula has over fifteen years of energy supply experience with a focus on industry leading customer service and back -office service expertise. Paula began her career as an Analyst with Sempra Energy Solutions, building foundational knowledge of the deregulat ed energy industry and bill processing, including operational support of CCAs in the first years of CCA launching in California . While at Calpine Energy Solutions, Paula gained experience in various operational roles as a Commodity Billing Analyst and Commodity Billing Supervisor. In her previous role leading the National Billing and Customer Care team, she primarily focused on California, Oregon and Texas account management and invoicing for large commercial accounts. Paula motivates her teams to excellence, accuracy, and world class customer service. Paula rejoined the CCA management team in 2016 and has focused on CCA operational growth and excellence, driving utility, technical, and control improvements. The CCA Operations Department consists of five teams that provide expertise in Billing, Rates & Tariffs, Utility Data, CCA Accounts, and Contact Center Solutions.
Josh Brock, Vice President, CCA Commercial Operations, Josh is a leader in California in the field of climate action and energy with over 15 years of experience in the industry. He has worked in roles across the market starting in city government, and spanning investor-owned utilities, nonprofits, and the private sector. Josh’s work in local government covers the full range of sustainability, energy, land use, policy and legislative landscape giving him a broad understanding and perspective of the local government landscape. While at San Diego Gas & Electric, he led their government and climate change programs including “Grid 2.0” initiatives, locational efficiency, demand response, micro-grid, and distributed energy resources. Before joining Calpine Energy Solutions in 2018, Josh worked at a fast-growing start-up in the energy & climate finance space, managing their local government, regulatory, and market development efforts. Josh and his team engaged in successful legislative efforts, getting critical bills amended and signed into law. Additionally, Josh was responsible for growing the footprint of the program through thoughtful and strategic engagement with local government officials throughout California. As a Vice President at Calpine Energy Solutions, Josh provides leadership to the Calpine Energy Solutions team and will be a strategic partner for the City’s leadership.
Julien Gattaciecca, Director, CCA Market Development , Julien leads Calpine Energy Solutions’ market development effort, overseeing all strategic partnerships related to research, customer behavior, and demand C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 15
flexibility, and managing business development outside of California. Prior to joining Calpine, Julien directed research at the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation, collaborating with state agencies, the US DOE, and NREL on various research activities and reports. Julien holds multiple master’s degrees in business and finance and has worked throughout Europe and Asia prior to settling in California.
Santiago Chuck, Managing Director of CCA Products & Services , Santiago oversees Calpine’s CCA systems, products, and infrastructure. With a team of developers, analysts, and product managers, Santiago’s team supports the development and deployment of Calpine’s highly customized and tailored solutions that have been the backbone of the ongoing operations of the significant majority of CCAs. With a focus on collaborating with customers to identify and resolve operational issues, he works side-by-side with CCA partners to assure the smooth and effective implementation of their programs. Santiago brings a wealth of experience in complex technical development of products and services in the fields of energy and medical services delivery. His skills allow Santiago to quickly understand and respond to clients’ needs by assembling key concepts and ideas into comprehensive strategic solutions directed at exceeding expectations.
Matt Messina , Director of CCA Client Services , Matt has over 10 years of experience leading some of California’s most innovative energy programs. His experience includes roles in both the non -profit and private sectors where he has managed teams and led projects on behalf of public agencies and local governments across the state. Beginning with a San Diego -based non-profit and later, with a burgeoning energy efficiency financing start-up, helping local governments design and implement programs and policies that will allow them to achieve their stated climate action goals has always been central to his work. For the last six years, Matt has been a part of Calpine Energy Solutions’ CCA Services team, first in the role of CCA Account Services Manager, and now, in his role as Director of CCA Client Services. In this capacity, Matt oversees a team of CCA Account Services Managers, supports business and market development efforts, and is part of the leadership team at Calpine. He and his team of account managers serve as the primary points of contact for all 21 of Calpine’s CCA clients.
Dharmesh Bharathan, Director of CCA Operations , Dharmesh has over ten years of experience in North American wholesale markets. With a background in Electrical Engineering, Dharmesh has managed a market operations center with a diversified portfolio of generation assets. In addition to this, he has suppo rted the day- to-day activity in Day -Ahead and Real -Time energy markets, Demand Response programs, Emergency Load Response, settlements, and bill reconciliation. Most recently, Dharmesh has joined the Calpine Energy Solutions team managing data processing and control, interface with the CAISO and usage management.
1.6.4 The Energy Coalition Staff Biographies
Craig Perkins, Executive Director and President of The Energy Coalition , Craig provides leadership, oversight and strategic input for all contracts, programs and policy work. Prior to joining TEC in 2008, he was Director of Environmental and Public Works Management for the City of Santa Monica, where he served for 25 years, and led development of the Sustainable City Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Solar Santa Monica Program.
He also directed the City’s water, wastewater, solid waste and stormwater utilities, and was in charge of design and construction services for City buildin gs and infrastructure. Craig has extensive experience designing and implementing energy programs and policies, including outreach strategies to key community stakeholder groups.
He played a key role in the creation of California's Regional Energy Networks, and development and implementation of the Bassett -Avocado Advanced Energy Community demonstration project. He has played a leadership role in advocating for state and local energy policies and program design and implementation strategies that result in su bstantial benefits for communities of concern. Craig holds an undergraduate degree from UC Berkeley, and Master’s Degrees from UCLA and CSU, Dominguez Hills.
Laurel Rothchild, Vice President, Laurel oversees The Energy Coalition’s diverse portfolio of programs and collaborates with stakeholders across the state to advance the organization's mission of empowering communities to leap into the future of clean energy. She has over 18 years of exp erience working with local governments and C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 16
communities to promote sustainable energy actions through various programs. As a proponent of local and community-based programs, Laurel has worked closely with Regional Energy Networks and Community Choice Aggregators to secure funding, design programs, and expand impactful services. Laurel is a current member of the California Energy Efficiency Coordinating Committee (CAEECC), a Board Member of the Association of Women Water Energy and the Environment (AWWEE), a Certified Energy Auditor (CEA), and a LEED AP O+M. She holds a B.S. in Business Economics from UCSB.
1.6.5 Best Best & Krieger Staff Biographies
Ryan Baron, Ryan offers strategic counsel to clients throughout California and the U.S. on utilities regulation, administrative law, environmental law and public agency governance matters. His practice spans regulatory, transactional and business issues in the areas o f energy, gas, water quality, air quality, wastewater, solid waste and climate change. He also has extensive experience with project development, entitlement and permitting matters, particularly with respect to large-scale infrastructure. Ryan represents clients on utility matters before a number of federal and state agencies as well as on utility transactional, business and governance matters. He represents a number of California community choice aggregators, commonly known as CCAs, and communi ties exploring CCA on all aspects of formation. This includes governance, implementation, regulatory and procurement matters. Ryan advises clients on forming electric municipal owned utilities and acquiring utility assets, including recent efforts in Colorado. He negotiates regularly with utility companies and advises on utility rules and tariffs.
Ryan’s previous experience includes advising on telecommunications regulations and projects.
Ryan advises community choice aggregators on feasibility, formation and implementation, including creation of enterprise funds and joint powers agencies, consultant contracts, energy and resource adequacy procurement, and CPUC and CEC regulation. Clients i nclude Western Community Energy, Desert Community Energy, Clean Power Alliance, San Jose Clean Energy, San Jacinto Power, the County of San Diego and various cities and counties exploring CCA or joining an existing CCA. He also represents clients in CPUC p roceedings such as CCA exit fees, resource adequacy, de-energization and wildfire cost recovery, utility undergrounding, Aliso Canyon investigation, PG&E and SDG&E investigations, IOU rate cases and other matters. Clients include CCAs, County of Los Angele s, water districts and private companies.
Prior to government service, Ryan practiced in Washington, D.C. with Kellogg, Huber Hansen, Todd Evans & Figel, PLLC working on behalf of Fortune 100 companies on regulatory litigation and federal enforcement actions. During law school, Ryan was a law clerk and junior lobbyist for the global government relations office of an international telecommunications company and was a legal intern in the International Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission and for FCC Commissioner Gloria Tristani. Ryan received his law degree from The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law in Washington, D.C. Ryan lived in the Commonwealth of Virginia for five years and he is very familiar with its communities.
1.6.6 AA dvantage Communications Staff Biographies
John Valdivia, John was elected Mayor by San Bernardino residents on November 6, 2018 --defeating an incumbent-- and installed on December 19, 2018 as the City’s 29th Mayor. Mr. Valdivia was originally elected to represent the City’s third ward with nearly 70% of the total vote in November 2011. As a City Councilman, Mayor Valdivia committed himself to neighborhood values, volunteering, and promoting civic pride for San Bernardino with a careful eye for watching the city's finances, and was instrumental in w elcoming a renaissance to the Hospitality Lane business corridor and key in attracting major retailers to the Inland Center Mall. Mayor Valdivia grew up in San Bernardino, attending City schools from K-12, and has been a proud resident since returning from college in the mid-west.
Now in private practice consulting, John Valdivia commits to dedicating the resources and personnel necessary to tackle crime and to support the businesses of the Inland Empire. He will continue to exercise good neighbor values C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 17
and continue to consider the impact of policy on the local taxpayer and business with the goal of enhancing the quality of life for families.
1.7 TURNKEY TEAM MANAGEMENT
GDS will be the prime contractor with the CCA and the Turnkey Team Partners will be subcontractors to GDS under any contract awarded for the pursuit of developing a CCA.
GDS will enter into a written agreement with the City to provide services as set forth in the Proposal and, in turn, GDS will enter into a separate written agreement with the Turnkey Team Partners to provide those services set aside for each teaming partner as described in the Proposal. Each Turnkey Team Partner will be responsible for payment to their own employees and subcontractors.
Once the City has identified and expresses interest in the CCA turnkey services, GDS will furnish each Turnkey Team Partner with a final scope of services. Each Turnkey Team Partner’s role as a subcontractor, including participation in the management of work performed under the client contract, will be defined in the final contract proposed to the City.
Each of the Turnkey Team Partners is an independent contractor of the other and neither Partner is, nor will be considered to be, nor will purport to act as, a representative of the other.
Other services typically necessary in implementing and operating a CCA will be discussed with the City and, if desired by the City, GDS will bring similarly experienced firms on board. As prime contractor, due to the availability of resources within GDS, and given the local availability of resources , GDS will assume responsibility for CCA implementation and operation administrative functions including: providing any necessary City staff updates, governing board updates (and preparation of all materials and presentation packages); supporting any financial reporting (audited and unaudited), managing any governing board documents and operating obligations, managing Turnkey Team service provider contracts, and meeting all City or governing board requirements.
1.8 FINANCIAL CAPABILITY
GDS Associates, Inc. (“GDS”)
Since its inception in January of 1986, GDS has grown from a small regional engineering and consulting firm based in Marietta, Georgia to large national firm with additional regional offices in Austin, Texas, Auburn, Alabama, Augusta, Maine, Redmond, Washi ngton, Madison, Wisconsin, Bedford, New Hampshire, Orlando, Florida and Folsom, CA.
GDS Associates, Inc. (“GDS”) currently has clients in 48 states and Canada and has seen revenue grow from $22.9 million in 2007 to $49.1 million in 2023. Over that same period the number of employees has increased from 118 to 192. Our consultants are recognized leaders in their respec tive fields, dedicated to their clients, innovative in their approach to meeting unique challenges, and known for consistently being available when needed.
Confidential financial statements will be provided upon request upon acceptance of our proposal. Listed below in Table 1-5, is a summary of GDS’ historical financial information including total annual revenues for the past eight.
TAB LE 1-5. G DS ASSOCIATE S ’ HISTORIC AL FIN ANCIAL INFORM ATION Year Total Annual Revenues
2016 $38,660,421
2017 $45,173,015
2018 $42,237,197
2019 $40,369,139
2020 $44,658,292
2021 $47,321,979
2022 $48,320,399
2023 $49,078,522
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 18
1.8.1 Tenaska
Tenaska Energy, Inc. and Tenaska Energy Holdings, LLC, collectively referred to as “Tenaska” is one of the largest private, independent energy companies in the United States. Founded in 1987, Tenaska has grown from a small power plant developer to a leader in power generation and energy marketin g. Tenaska has expertise in energy management, electric power & natural gas marketing, development and acquisition of energy assets, and operation of generation facilities.
Tenaska began operating in California in 2012 and is currently providing Scheduling Coordinator, Energy Management, Optimization and Settlement Services for many customers within the CAISO and WECC footprints.
Tenaska currently provides these services to a number of California CCAs including Clean Power Alliance of Southern California (“CPA”), San Diego Community Power (“SDCP”), Central Coast Community Energy (“3CE”) and Silicon Valley Clean Energy ( “SVCE”). In 2015, T enaska executed an agreement to provide Energy Management and Scheduling Coordinator Services for a generator in CAISO owned by a company that owns multiple generators across the country. As a testament to Tenaska’s excellent customer service, after less than a month of serving the generator, the owner elected to hire T enaska to serve eight of its other generators in California, as well as an additional six generators outside of California.
Because Tenaska is a privately held company, it is not rated by the ratings agencies. However, it has considerable financial strength and size. In 2022, Tenaska ranked among the top 40 largest privately held U.S. companies on Forbes magazine annual list with total assets valued at $7.4 billion. Also in 2022, Tenaska earned revenues of $25.1 billion and its total balance sheet equity was valued at $2.7 billion.
Tenaska’s parent entities, Tenaska Energy, Inc. (“TEI”) and Tenaska Energy Holdings (“TEH”) provide credit support for Tenaska’s obligations to its customers. Audited financial statements of such entities can be provided upon execution of a Confidentiality Agreement governing the nondisclosure of such financial information contained therein.
One of the hallmarks of Tenaska’s financial approach over the past 35 years has been its ability to initiate new investments from a firm financial foundation. Tenaska maintains financial stability and deep energy expertise to assess risks and opportunities and make the kind of decisions that will continue to enable long-term strength.
1.8.2 Calpine
Calpine Energy Solutions is a subsidiary of Calpine Corporation which was acquired in early 2018 for $5.6 billion by a consortium of investors led by private equity firm Energy Capital Partners. As a privately held company, Calpine does not disclose its financial data, however Calpine maintains a credit rating of Ba3 with Moody’s and B+ with S&P. Calpine Energy Solutions is a stable company with the financial strength and proven history to weather uncertainty. Disclosures filed by Calpine Corporation with t he U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission may be found HERE.
1.8.3 The Energy Coalition
TEC has provided 3 years of audited financials and can be found in Appendix C.
1.8.4 Best Best & Krieger
BBK is currently employed for provision of City Attorney services by the City of Fontana. BBK has contracted with GDS to participate as CCA regulatory counsel for Turnkey CCA clients and refers the City to their existing contract for provision of the financial health of BBK.
1.8.5 AAdvantage Communications
Financial documents are not available at the time of submittal of this proposal.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 19
2 Additional Proposal Content
2.1 NARRATIVE
In narrative format, below describes the steps and activities our Team will perform to complete the scope of work requested.
2.1.1 Feasibility Study, Business/Implementation Plan ( GDS ) The CCA Feasibility Study is the most critical component in helping a City understand, evaluate and decide if operating a CCA is viable. Most, but not all, CCAs have started with a Feasibility Study. We believe that City executives and electeds need investigative due diligence on CCA to justify to their constituents why CCA is being examined and why they may move forward with implementing a CCA. Given that, we provide much detail on the steps that go into developing a CCA Feasibility Study and we illustrate the comprehensiveness and conservativeness that go into CCA feasibility assumptions, costs, revenues, options for operating a CCA, risks and risk mitigation, sensitivity ranges of risk factors and their impact on bottom line financial viability which comes down to: “can a CCA provide equivalent (or lower) rates than SCE and cover all operations costs with revenues?” The components of the CCA Feasibility Study and a description of our approach are below. GDS will be the lead Team member on the Feasibility Study.
2.1.1.1 Load Analysis and Forecast
GDS will request SCE energy consumption data from the City or directly from SCE. SCE provides documents which must be signed by a city’s mayor and city staff to receive the data and hold it under a non-disclosure agreement.
GDS may then receive the data from the city – or GDS can acquire it directly from SCE with the city’s approval.
GDS will then review, format, and import load data into an analytical framework and prepare summary level data for residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and municipal account. GDS will prepare a 10-year load forecast in consideration of this data, using applicable load profiles made available by SCE.
GDS will then prepare an electricity load forecast that references historical information and projects future electricity usage and peak demand across all customer classes, taking into account growth in renewable generation capacity (e.g. rooftop solar) and other appropriate factors, such as compensation for transmission and distribution electric line losses. This task will also entail the development of class-specific forecasts which will be aggregated to comprise a composite of expected electrical energy requirements (and daily shape) for the entire city, accounting for seasonal and hourly variations. This aggregated forecast will be developed in a manner that will allow for the inclusion or ex clusion of current direct access electrical accounts (i.e., those accounts being provided electricity by a third party, as identified in customer data provided by the utility, against the event that such accounts elect to become CCA customers.
GDS will then estimate the number of megawatt-hours that will be required annually and each hour of the year to serve electricity service supply obligations of the CCA during the first ten years of its operations and estimate the city’s peak demand service responsibility for each year for purposes of quantifying pertinent resource adequacy requirements (“RAR”). RAR is a regulatory mandated requirement for utilities and CCAs to purchase the ability to deliver power at 117% of the projected maximum load of the territory for electric grid reliability support.
GDS will then analyze renewable energy requirements to achieve compliance with California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard as well as other pertinent information that may be required to develop supplier bid specifications and promote successful CCA implementation. GDS will consult with the City on if the City wishes to have the analysis project financial viability at varying levels of providing mandated renewable energy requirements, including potentially providing 100% renewable energy to constituents.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 20
Based on these renewable energy provision scenarios, GDS will examine the projected greenhouse reductions (through the use of varying levels of renewable/clean energy), and the projected financial impacts of varying levels of renewable energy integration.
2.1.1.2 Rate Analysis
GDS will prepare both CCA and SCE rate analysis based on reasonable estimates of future SCE rate increases/fluctuations and rate structure changes based on active rate-setting proposals and proceedings ongoing at the CPUC (required of SCE, but not of CCAs) and historical prices, trends and factors. GDS will also examine other factors that may affect future increases (e.g. local generation construction, power spot market pricing, increasing state renewable energy mandates and declining cost of renewables, etc.). GDS will address any factor that may significantly affect future rates, including ancillary services, transmission congestion impacts, and transmission scheduling and coordination costs.
GDS will present rate scenarios based on high, medium and low estimates of future SCE pricing for all rate classes.
It will include rate structure information in a format similar to existing SCE rates thus ensuring a greater ability for rate comparison between SCE and the CCA.
Other rate considerations will be addressed in this technical analysis including:
Identification and evaluation of factors that may affect comparative rates, e.g., combinations of the following: high and low natural gas price escalation, trends and variations in hydroelectric power generation, expected rate restructuring, and active state policy proposals affecting local electricity usage, substitution and supply);
SCE costs and surcharges embedded in rate forecasts that directly affect costs of CCA -provided generation services;
Forecasted rates for all customers assuming there is no CCA and/or for customers that opt out of CCA service; and
Based on IOU rate forecasts and other independent rate forecasts and estimates of non -generation costs, compile completed electric generation service cost estimates for projected CCA customers.
2.1.1.3 Energy Procurement
As part of developing a cost estimate for purchasing power for a CCA, GDS will model three scenarios for the energy procurement requirements of the CCA. The scenarios will examine the likely range of rates for SCE to determine the competitiveness of CCA rates against SCE. The scenarios will reflect historic, current, and future market conditions. Each scenario will also estimate GHG impacts compared to SCE’s power supply composition.
GDS’ analysis will consider variations in how both the renewable and non-renewable portions of the power mix can be obtained (e.g., in -state, in-city, in- county, out-of-state, unbundled vs. bundled renewable energy credits (“REC”), technology opportunities, and net surplus energy generation opportunities), and non -renewable portfolio attributes (e.g., system purchases, natural gas, hydro-electric).
Working with the City, GDS can provide current and forecasted market information based on the following clean power supply scenarios. The analysis of each scenario will be designed to incorporate and specify the following variables: the use of renewable energy credits (paper certificates reflecting ownership of renewable power), the integration of local distributed resources for all of part of the supply portfolio, and the inclusion of preferred technologies, including solar PV, microgrids, storage and wind. These scenarios are provided as examples, the City may determine the scenarios to be analyzed:
OPTION 1: Baseline California (“CA”) qualified renewable content. The goal of CCA service will be to exceed California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (“RPS”) during the CCA’s first year of operation. So, the Option 1 C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 21
scenario should examine a supply scenario that meets or exceeds the RPS minimum at the time of CCA service commencement.
OPTION 2: RPS compliant share of CA qualified renewable energy (does not exceed). OPTION 3: (If desired}, h igh scenario of 100% CA qualified renewable energy that would be offered on a premium, voluntary basis, with a substantial and increasing portion of that coming from local renewable resources in the County and general region as the program develops over time.
2.1.1.4 Sensitivity Analysis
GDS will then perform sensitivity analysis to examine the impact on CCA rates compared to SCE rates of a range of pricing factors. Forecasting models used in the technical analysis should be able to accommodate and will be used to conduct sensitivity analyses reflecting changes in the following variables:
Market prices for non-renewable electricity;
Market prices for renewable electricity from the current state-wide portfolio; Market prices for renewable electricity from new projects; Changes in IOU generation rates, exit fees and customer surcharges; Changes in policies affecting renewable electricity capacity development, including: 1) the possible reduction or elimination of the federal solar tax credit and production tax credit for wind power, and 2) proposed legislation adjusting state goals for renewable energy supply, building energy efficiency and transportation energy use;
CCA renewable energy portfolio targets that exceed state RPS requirements; Local renewable generation, energy efficiency and demand reduction programs (including opportunities that may exist within the next five years due to major PG&E contracts expiring); Potential customer opt-out rates with multi-tiered renewable energy mix based on industry standards; Potential customer opt-out rates associated with base levels of renewable energy mix offered at minimum RPS, Minimum RPS + 10%, and 100% (if desired); and
Extent rates may change depending on varying levels of customer participation (i.e. customer opt-out rates), e.g., if 75% of the eligible load joins a CCA, if 50%, 100%, etc., would rates and resources availability materially change? The modeling will identify a minimum level of participation necessary to meet goal of rate parity.
2.1.1.5 Comparative Analysis and Implementation Models The City will have options for operating alone or operating with other cities within a CCA. That is, the City may operate its own CCA or the City may join with another city (or more) and create a Joint Powers Authority which would then operate the CCA. In either case, under this Turnkey Team proposal, the Turnkey Team would provide all services to operate the CCA in either case. GDS will provide a comparative analysis of alternative implementation/governance models and service options for setting up and operating a City CCA.
GDS will prepare a comparison table for the alternative implementation models listed above including the following items:
Contracting terms for each of the entities/model types, including length of contract and costs of exit. Flexibility and control the City would have in selecting its preferred energy sources, developing local energy resources, adjusting its rate structure and supply mix, utilizing public purpose funds (“PPF”) for County programs, and other objectives related to the County’s goals. Start-up costs incurred by County and potential public agency partners. Governance, management and staffing requirements for City and potential public agency partners. Ability to accumulate reserve funds and assess their potential uses. Time required to form the CCA and begin serving customers.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 22
Level of discretion over program revenues.
Credit capacity and management expertise of the CCA under the various options.
2.1.1.6 Feasibility Study, Business/Implementation Plan ( GDS) Developing financial pro-forma is critical to assessing the viability of operating a CCA and forms the foundation for evaluating the overall cost/benefit potential of a CCA. Costs will include upfront program development and implementation costs as well as other ratepayer costs owed to SCE under CCA regulations.
As part of this proposal, GDS will estimate the Turnkey Team portion of the CCA operating costs based on our experience developing these feasibility studies for other clients and based on receiving refreshed service pricing information from the Turnkey Team Partners. These costs, in addition to other non-power supply administrative and Turnkey service provider costs, and the costs to procure power are the sum total of operating costs for a CCA.
As GDS will forecast rates for the CCA, the financial viabil ity of the CCA relies on revenues from rates being able to cover all forecasted CCA operating costs.
This comprehensive analysis will include:
A base case financial pro forma, including income, balance sheet and cash flow analysis, detailing costs and projected benefits under the three electric supply scenarios outlined earlier. An analysis detailing costs and projected benefits under sensitivity case assumptions. Identification of known and predictable cost -of-service variables and incorporate these into base -case analyses. Predictable cost-of- service variables include:
Energy Costs - Variable inputs for resource portfolio mixes to account for forecasted spot market prices, long and short-term information from power supply contracts, and varying degrees of renewable energy supply. CCA Start-up costs including Turnkey Team consultant costs, regulatory costs, fees owed to SCE Cost of capital including acquisition of a loan for Start-up costs, if necessary, and establishing a working capital and line of credit banking account to cover CCA operations CCA Operations and Maintenance costs including administrative and general expenses, staffing (if desired), external services not included in the Turnkey Team offering (in -house counsel, accounting/audit, city/CCA governing board development, additional and specific community outreach desires. An estimate of the amount of revenues lost from non-payment accounts. The amount of financial reserves desired by the City/CCA Regulated fees including bonding for potential customer re-entry to SCE service if the CCA ceases service, cost recovery fees for SCE determined from power contracts SCE holds for City customers Potential for growth of customer self-generation from rooftop solar and battery installation. Potential growth of energy efficiency adoption in the City.
2.1.1.7 Risk Analysis
GDS will describe and analyze the potential risks to the program, and outline risk-mitigation measures. Such risks include, but are not limited to:
Risks that could cause a CCA to “fail” and the financial risks to the City in the event of such failure. The financial risk to a CCA that procures too much or too little electricity and what the reasons might be for demand forecast inaccuracy (e.g. higher than expected customer opt-out rate). Regulatory and legislative risk, due to rules changes at the California Public Utilities Commission ( “CPUC”) or changes in state law that affect the ability of CCAs to be competitive. The ability for the CCA to procure the necessary amounts of renewable energy in order to meet RPS standards, particularly if the RPS rises to 50% by 2030 and the demand for renewable energy spikes. Evaluate concerns that there may not be enough renewable e nergy supply with a number of new CCAs potentially coming into the market.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 23
Market volatility and price risk.
Risk management mitigation measures and an assessment of City liability exposure.
DELIVERABLES: GDS will perform and deliver the following under the task for developing the CCA feasibility study and business plan:
Prepare and present to City staff and others directed by the City a more detailed, overall timeline, in Gantt format, outlining the steps necessary to implement the CCA including milestones, assignments and anticipated dates to accomplish each major milestone.
A First Draft of the Feasibility Report for approval by the City. The Draft Feasibility Report will detail the results of the technical analysis, including recommendations for CCA organization and implementation and an assessment of the overall cost-benefit potential to support a threshold decision to move forward with CCA. Costs will include upfront program development and implementation costs as well as net rate- payer costs over the forecast period. Quantifiable benefits will include net GHG reductions, expanded use of renewable energy resources, local economic development and reduced exposure to volatile fossil fuel costs.
Meetings with the City (staff and electeds) to review comments, prepare a final draft of the Feasibility Report for publication to a diverse audience.
Presentation materials regarding the feasibility report to the City and City stakeholders.
2.1.2 Post -Feasibility Report Activities , CCA Creation and Operation After issuance of the final Feasibility Report, the entire Turnkey Team will be available to meet with City staff and electeds as requested to respond to questions and input any revisions as necessary. The goal of this support is to have the Study presented by staff to City electeds for presentation, review and ultimately, approval by the City.
It will be up to the City if the Study results are to be presented to City stakeholders and the community. The GDS Team will support any of these meetings for the purpose of receiving stakeholder and community input. The City will then be faced with a decision as to whether to proceed with moving forward with investigating CCA formation.
The Turnkey Team will be available to respond to questions, concerns, and propose next steps. If the City decides to proceed with CCA formation, the following steps will be taken.
2.1.2.1 Public Presentations
The Turnkey Team will provide presentations to City electeds, executives and other staff as desired by the City. If requested, The Turnkey Team may also provide community workshops for the benefit of constituents and other stakeholders (e.g., Chamber of Commerce, higher education, labor organizations, environmental organizations, etc.).
As described in the RFP, other cities may join in the development of the Feasibility Study and/or operation of the CCA. Our Turnkey Team will also offer public presentations to other interested cities electeds, executives, staff and community stakeholders.
2.1.2.2 Governance , CCA Legal Creation
The Feasibility Study will address governance options (single city CCA, multiple city JPA, individual cities’ CCAs using a Turnkey Team of service providers, joining an existing CCA) but typically staff and electeds will want to vet these options in more detail.
If multiple cities desire to form a single CCA, formation of a Joint Powers Authority to govern the CCA is likely. Our Turnkey Team has access to JPA governing documents used by other CCA JPAs which include Memorandums of Understanding and Operating Rules and Guidelines. We can work with the City and other cities in forming the JPA.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 24
Under certain circumstances, a city may wish to form a city -governed CCA. Our Turnkey Team has also assisted cities in creating such a CCA. A city may legally create a CCA through two city council actions: 1) introduce an ordinance indicating the desire to create a CCA, and 2) adopt the ordinance at a following meeting. Our Team has ordinance introduction language that has been used by other cities and we can be present at any council meetings to respond to questions and/or make presentations.
2.1.2.3 Financing
The Feasibility Study will address CCA Start -up and Operational financing needs and estimate amounts needed and options for acquiring them. The Turnkey Team will work with its CCA financing experts to obtain specific costs and terms for both financing needs. Selection of financing, especially start-up financing may be needed to proceed with creating the CCA , meeting regulatory requirements , and preparing for operations. Our Turnkey Team will also work with the City and other agencies to identify and seek other sources of funding to start-up the CCA. Later in the implementation process, t he Turnkey Team will procure the larger-scale operations financing through a banking Line of Credit to meet additional, initial implementation and operating costs and provide working capital during initial CCA operations. Our Turnkey Team has acquired short- and long-term financing for other CCAs in the State.
2.1.2.4 CPUC Registration, CCA Operations Timing
Once the City/cities have created a CCA through the steps described above, the Turnkey Team will create an Implementation Plan and file it with the CPUC. This legally required activity notifies the CPUC of the intent of the City to operate a CCA and it provides technical information about the City CCA most of which is taken from the Feasibility Study. Once the Implementation Plan has been filed and approved by the CPUC, one full calendar must pass before the CCA can begin operations. If the City CCA Impleme ntation Plan were filed and approved before the end of calendar y ear 2024, then the soonest the CCA could serve customers would be January 2026. If the Implementation Plan were filed and approved during 2025, then the soonest the CCA could serve customers would be January 2027. The CCA will also be required to submit a bond to cover expenses for returning customers to SCE if the CCA ceases operations.
This waiting period will not be a non -activity waiting period for the CCA . That time will be utilized to have the Turnkey Team members perform a number of CCA pre-operation tasks specific to their roles, including:
Providing additional regulatory filings at the CPUC providing CCA historic load information and forecasted loads, sources for additional energy capacity to meet CA transmission grid reliability requirements; Issuing solicitations seeking energy suppliers and ancillary services, develop ing of risk management plans, securing contracts for energy supply;
Securing banking line of credit and finalizing the CCA operations plan using updated energy supply costs, retail rates, and non-energy supply related costs;
Implementing procedures and protocols for communication with: SCE for customer billing and revenue transactions, the CA and western U.S. transmission grid operations system for dispatching purchased energy from sources to the CCA territory, CCA customers through website development and legally mandated customer notifications regarding CCA operations (i.e., customer opt-out notices and instructions). Conducting CCA governance activities including board meetings, approval of certain CCA operating decisions (e.g., approving retail rates), and communications with other cities as potential JPA members.
The Turnkey CCA Team members' activities are described in more detail in the rest of this section and below.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 25
2.1.3 California Independent System Operator (CAISO) Scheduling and Dispatching Coordination and Related Energy Management Services (Schedule Coordinator – Tenaska)
The Turnkey Team Schedule Coordinator , Tenaska, will provide all necessary CAISO interface services for delivering power through the transmission and distribution grids – and ending up at the customer meters. This will all be done on behalf of the CCA as a legal energy service provider for the meters enrolled in the CCA service territory, and the submission of schedules, bids, and other required information for CCA’s market-supplied energy, renewable energy, and resource adequacy capacity in accordance with the obligations of a service provider as defined by the CAISO. Resource Adequacy ( “RA”) is a requirement for all energy providers (IOUs and CCAs) to secure the potential energy supply equal to 11 7% of the estimated CCA peak load at any point in time. RA is a service required by the State to assist in securing transmission grid reliability.
Scheduling and Dispatch services will include short-term forecasting of the CCA load (i.e., week-ahead, day-ahead, and hour-ahead), scheduling the load into the CAISO day -ahead market, validating CAISO statements for load settlements (i.e. truing up delive ries against actual consumption), minimizing and managing real -time energy supply/consumption imbalance exposure, as well as the initial set-up and ongoing management of the Congestion Revenue Rights (“CRR”) portfolio through the CRR allocation and potentially bidding into the various CRR auctions (all required by the CAISO).
2.1.3.1 Scheduling Coordinator and Related Energy Management Services Tenaska will be responsible for working with the City and the GDS Turnkey Team to develop long and short-term optimization strategies for optimizing power purchases based on market conditions, mitigating excessive power supplies or shortfalls, and avoiding peak power market price purchases. Tenaska will utilize information provided by their trading and market analysis groups as well as any customer-specific parameters to recommend optimization strategies. Upon determination of an optimization strategy for the City , the Tenaska will oversee execution of the strategy and monitor its performance. The Tenaska Energy Manager actively seeks opportunities to improve each customer’s economic performance through extracting maximum value from their assets and positions.
2.1.3.2 Trading/Commercial Desk
Tenaska provides a Real-Time Energy Management (RTEM) service that is responsible for the economic monitoring and optimization of the real-time dispatch of customer power generation facilities, controllable load, and storage resources across the United States. This is advantageous to the extent the City CCA includes local power generation sources and equipment within the City that may be controllable. The Real-Time Energy Management desk is staffed 24/7 by a team of experienced energy managers who seek oppo rtunities to capture additional revenue for customers using proprietary technology and sophisticated market analytics. RTEM interacts with the Energy Managers, Real -Time Traders, and System operators to understand current customer needs and seek creative solutions to maximize value for customers within pre-determined risk metrics.
Tenaska’s analytics group will provide meaningful information to Traders and Energy Managers so that they may recommend and execute optimization strategies for the City CCA. The analytics team has an array of trading tools at their disposal and subscribes to various real-time and daily market information sources. Tenaska has acquired several databases that provide historical data necessary for the analytics group to model market conditions, which aids Tenaska’s Energy Managers and Traders in making market decisions.
2.1.3.3 Operations
Tenaska will utilize its dedicated 24/7 Operations Desk with a rotating staff of qualified system operators, each of whom holds N ational Energy Regulatory Commission Operator Certification. This desk performs the following functions for Tenaska customers:
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 26
Manages updates and adjustments to customers’ energy bids and offers, schedules, and two-party trade transactions.
Continually monitors, dispatches, and communicates operational requirements to each customer. Maintains updated generator outage schedules for licensed power supply plants throughout the region.
2.1.3.4 Disaster Recovery Site
Tenaska maintains a 24-hour, seven-day-per-week back-up scheduling and operating center or Disaster Recovery Site (DR Site). In the event of a loss of the primary computer systems or facilities, the DR Site is staffed and all systems are failed over so that opera tions activities can be performed. All systems at the T enaska DR Site run concurrently and continuously, identically to and in coordination with the systems at the Tenaska primary site.
2.1.3.5 Settlements and Disputes
Tenaska performs review and confirmation for all settlement statements with energy providers and energy sources to validate invoices and ensure their accuracy. T enaska compares their generated Settlement Report to their own Predictive Settlement Statement to identify discrepancies, and then runs a report to identify settlement charges and payments. The settlements group also files disputes and manages the dispute resolution process es with counterparties in order to resolve any billing discrepancies.
2.1.3.6 Risk Management
The T enaska Risk Management team uses a mixture of parametric/closed -form models and Monte Carlo simulation tools to offer a comprehensive suite of risk analytics around market pricing , City CCA optimization strategies, profits/earnings, and future risk exposures, among other factors. The Risk Management team can also perform bespoke what-if hedge and scenario analyses to trial hedging strategies before implementing them. The Risk Management team works closely with the front office and Market Analysis group s to ensure that risk management goals are being met effectively.
2.1.4 Power Supply Portfolio Management and Power Procurement Portfolio Management (Power Supply Manager – GDS)
The Turnkey Team Power Supply Manager, GDS, will provide load forecasting services, energy consumption portfolio modeling, and will ensure the City’s CCA power supply meets California mandates for renewable energy, storage, long-term contracts, and resource adequacy. The portfolio manager will also manage regulatory filings related to load forecasting, resource adequacy, power procurement, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
The Power Supply Manager will help develop and participate in a risk management process, as well as produce, maintain, and publish reports tracking City CCA compliance with portfolio exposure, market risk and credit limits.
GDS will identify and present risk -mitigation strategies to City’s CCA risk management team and leadership.
Particular attention will be paid to proposed approaches to manage the risk to rate competitiveness and how to incorporate those approaches within City’s CCA procurement strategies. GDS will also draft, implement and comply with appropriate Energy Risk Managem ent Policies , as authored under the statewide CCA trade association best practices guide, and will assist City CCA management and staff in presenting various reports and results to the City CCA governing body.
GDS will prepare and issue power supply RFPs and negotiate power contracts on the City CCA’s behalf, and/or assist the City CCA in procuring all requisite energy products ( resource adequacy, capacity, renewable and GHG free products) to meet City’s CCA power supply portfolio requirements while fully complying with applicable regulatory and legislative mandates, CAISO rules and practices, and City CCA Program goals and objectives, including i ts enterprise risk management policy. Activities will include issui ng RFPs for multi -year off -take agreements, reviewing and evaluating bids, and negotiating bilateral power-purchase agreements with third-party power providers.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 27
The City CCA will need a significant amount of new renewable resources and is required to purchase at least 65% of its RPS requirement from long -term contracts of 10 years or more. GDS will define its approach to acquiring renewable resources that meet California mandates as well as acquiring new renewable projects within the City CCA region.
2.1.5 Bill Data Management and Customer Call Center Services, Electronic Data Exchange Services (Bill Data Manager – Calpine)
2.1.5.1 Data Management
Calpine will receive and process CCA service requests (CCASRs) from SCE as customers opt out (or back into) the City’s CCA customer program. Accounts’ status such as a rate class change or opening/closing of an account with the CCA will be tracked.
Calpine will obtain customer usage data from SCE’s customer server, including hourly interval usage data at billing level quality. Calpine will also communicate and store the amount to be billed by SCE for the energy provided by the City CCA. Calpine will also receive and store payment transactions from SCE after customer payments are received by the SCE from City CCA customers.
2.1.5.2 Reporting
Calpine will develop a web -based rate comparison tool for all comparable City CCA and SCE rates. Calpine will submit a monthly generation extract file to the Western Renewable Energy Generation Information System (WREGIS) on City CCA’s behalf, another regulatory energy supplier reporting mandate.
Calpine will generate, at a minimum, these reports for CCA Turnkey Team and City use:
Daily and monthly report of billing information (e.g., usage, amount, customer information, etc.) and payment transactions received.
Weekly report of delinquent accounts, exceptions (e.g., usage delayed, usage received but unbilled, usage gaps, etc.), and accounts added and dropped.
A monthly report of billing errors, billing timeliness, customer call center inquiries received, average time required to respond to the inquiry, and percentage of issues resolved.
Other reports may be proposed by the Turnkey CCA Team or the City CCA.
2.1.5.3 Customer Information System
Calpine will establish an operational customer relationship management system within 30 days of contract execution, and establish an operational customer information system within 60 days of contract execution. This will allow the Turnkey Team or the City CCA:
To have functional access to the online database to add customer interactions and other account notes To view customer email or written letter correspondence within the online database View IOU bills for City CCA customers
Calpine will:
Maintain a customer database of all City CCA customers and identify each customer's enrollment status, rate tariff election, payment history, collection status, on -site generating capacity, if applicable, and any correspondence with the customer.
Maintain and provide as-needed, historical usage data on all CCA customers for up to five years and maintain accessible archives of billing records from the start of the CCA service or a period of not less than five years. Maintain and communicate a record of customers who have been offered service with City CCA but have elected to opt out, either before or after starting service with City CCA. Calpine will maintain and communicate C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 28
records of net energy metering credits and generation data for customers with self-generation (i.e., solar) to be posted on bills and settled at least annually (as SCE does for solar customers). Store historical, SCE SmartMeter usage data, as available from SCE, for a 2-year window, and when requested by the City CCA, place SmartMeter program charges on the relevant customer account. Identify customers participating in various OCPA programs in database and include various program payment information in all relevant reports, and perform quarterly OCPA program reviews to assess appropriate customer charge level.
Maintain all customer data according to City’s CCA customer privacy policy (to be developed by Calpine if needed) and the requirements of relevant California Public Utilities Commission Decisions including D.12-08- 045, including a daily backup process.
Develop and maintain a data management provider security breach policy.
2.1.5.4 Customer Call Center
Calpine will provide professional multilingual Interactive Voice Response (IVR) recordings for CCA customer call center and provide an option for IVR self -service and track how many customers start and complete self -service options without live-agent assistance.
Calpine will staff a call center, during City CCA statutory customer enrollment periods: 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. a day, 7 days a week, in to process opt out requests. Calpine will also staff a call center during Non -Enrollment Periods between the hours of 8 AM an d 5 PM PPT Monday through Friday, excluding City and SCE holidays. Calpine will provide sufficient call center staffing to meet the requirements set forth below, including designating City CCA specific agents to the extent needed to provide for full functionality and a call center supervisor that will serve as the main point of contact between City CCA and the customer call center staff.
Calpine will provide a sufficient number of data manager experts available to manage escalated calls between the hours of 8 AM and 5 PM PPT Monday through Friday, excluding City CCA and IOU holidays (“Regular Business Hours”).
Calpine will ensure the Call Center adheres to performance standards during non -enrollment and enrollment periods addressing:
A minimum number of calls answered within certain time periods 100% of voicemail messages answered within one (1) business day 100% of emails receive an immediate automated acknowledgement % of emails receiving a customized response within certain number of days Minimum abandon rate for all calls
Calpine will ensure the Call Center will accomplish the following:
Provide callers with the estimated hold time, if applicable Provide an automated ‘call back’ option for callers who will be put on hold for an estimated five minutes or longer
Record all inbound calls and make recordings available to Turnkey Team and City CCA staff upon request Maintain an archive of such recorded calls for a minimum period of 24 months Track call center contact quality with established set of criteria The Customer Call Center will also ensure the following are accomplished regarding customer service:
Evaluate customer satisfaction through voluntary customer surveys that ask general questions about call quality, call resolution, and how satisfied the customer was with the service received.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 29
Respond to customer inquiries received through email, fax, or web-portal. Receive calls from CCA customers referred to provider by the IOU and receive calls from CCA customers choosing to contact provider directly without referral from SCE.
Provide the call center number on SCE invoices allowing City CCA customers to contact the call center. Collect and/or confirm current email, mailing address and phone number of customers and add to or update database during inbound call.
Respond to telephone inquiries from CCA customers using a script developed and updated quarterly by the City CCA. For questions not addressed within the script, refer inquiries either back to SCE or to the City CCA. Respond to customer inquiries within 24 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, including inquiries received either through telephone calls, email, fax or web-portal.
The Customer Call Center will also ensure the following regarding Call Center management and administration:
Provide monthly reports that demonstrate whether performance standards have been met. Participate in coordination meetings, at CCA and Turnkey Team request, to promote the resolution of any customer service issues. Such meetings may include CCA management/ staff and may require on -site participation by Turnkey Team’s management/staff.
Ensure monthly status reports are provided during the first week of each month. Use commercially reasonable efforts to make Spanish speaking call center staff available to customers during regular business hours and provide translation services for inbound calls for other languages requested by the City CCA.
Host CCA and Turnkey Team meetings with call center management and representatives on a bimonthly basis.
2.1.5.5 Billing Administration
Calpine will review the application of City CCA rates to SCE accounts to ensure that the proper City CCA rates are applied to the appropriate SCE accounts.
Related to managing City CCA customer billings, Calpine will maintain a table of City CCA rate schedules and calculate customer bills by applying customer account usage provided by the SCE against the City CCA rates. In doing so, Calpine will:
Maintain a table of City CCA rate schedules and calculate bills. Apply IOU account usage against applicable OCPA rates. Send certain OCPA program charges as a separate line item to IOU for placement on monthly bill during term of repayment.
Apply IOU account hourly interval usage data for all OCPA customers against applicable rate to allow for customer billing.
Review application of OCPA rates to IOU accounts to ensure that the proper rates are applied to the accounts. Send certain OCPA program charges for non-OCPA customers, when supported by IOU, based on information provided to provider by OCPA
Provide timely billing information to SCE to meet their billing window period, check preliminary bills going to SCE for reasonableness before the bills are sent out, and remedy billing errors in a timely manner, within no more than one SCE billing cycle.
Assist with the settlement process for net energy metering customers on at least an annual basis and potentially monthly by identifying eligible customers, providing accrued charges and credits, and providing mailing list to the Turnkey Team designated printer for customer notifications. Provide a customer mailing list to the Turnkey Team designated printer for new move -in customer notices and opt out confirmation letters routinely within 7 days of enrollment or opt out. Send a City CCA provided letter to customers that are overdue on payments and if no payment is received from the customer after a certain amount of time, issue documentation to return customer to SCE.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 30
2.1.6 Customer Programs, Customer Outreach (The Energy Coalition – TEC) The Turnkey Team Customer Program Manager and Customer Outreach Manager, TEC, will design and implement and maintain a CCA website which will provide regulatory required information: rate comparisons between City CCA and SCE, customer opt out and opt back in information, and regulatory reporting documents to the CPUC.
The website will include a process for customers to opt out. Other information to be included on the CCA website, at a minimum, will include: description of CCA, the City CCA’s governing body, the CCA service territory, regulatory and other documents describing the CCA, customer information related to SCE rates – especially for low income and rebates and incentives, information about customer programs the CCA may be administering, and other stakeholders in the community supporting the CCA.
Once a City has legally declared and filed at the CPUC to operate a CCA, the State requires a minimum of four notifications to customers informing them of the creation of the CCA and providing them with instructions for opting out of CCA service. TEC will create those customer notifications and the customer information will be passed on to Calpine to exclude opt-out customers from the CCA customer base.
TEC will assist the City CCA in acquiring funds available to local governments, including CCAs, for the development of customer demand-side management programs. This will include, but not be limited to:
CPUC Energy Efficiency Program funding for CCAs
Inland Regional Energy Network Energy Efficiency funding for local governments Participation in IOU customer programs (for which the City CCA customers are eligible) Acquiring funds available to local governments from other CA regulatory agencies, including: CA Energy Commission, CA Governor’s Office Strategic Growth Council, CA Air Resources Board, Regional Air Quality Districts
Options for the City in investigating customer programs includes:
Facilitating participation in the Inland Regional Energy Network administered by the San Bernardino Association of Governments under which the CPUC provides funding for groups of local governments Creating a CCA energy efficiency program with the CPUC also provides funding for enhancing participation in SCE customer programs
Investigating and accessing program grants made available for local governments from various state agencies (i.e., CA Energy Commission, CA Air Resources Board, CA Strategic Growth Council, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, and others)
Investigating and participating in programs administered by the CA Independent System Operator and SCE which encourage the development of local distributed energy resource projects in location -specific areas of the transmission and distribution grids described in more detail under Value Added Services
2.2 GANTT CHART
The Gantt Chart schedule shown in Figure 2 -1 depicts an optimistic, best -case scenario for a CCA to begin operations by January of 2026. The CPUC mandates a one -calendar year waiting period before a CCA can begin operations and after a CCA submits its registration and an Implementation Plan to the CPUC and receives approval.
So to operate in 2026, the City CCA must submit these documents by the end of calendar year 2024. At this point in time, it is possible for this to occur although this is a much quicker timeline than we are used to operating with.
We believe , for now , this is viable because the Turnkey Team approach does expedite the nor mal CCA implementation and start-up timeline.
Alternatively, and perhaps more likely, the implementation and start-up activities could take place beyond 2024 and into 2025 . T he necessary CPUC filings could occur before the end of calendar year 2025, and the CPUC mandatory calendar year waiting period would take place in 2026. The City CCA would then commence operations in 2027.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 31
FIGURE 2-1. PR OPOSE D PR OJEC T SC HE DULE
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 32
2.3 COST OF SERVICES
The cost to operate the Turnkey CCA will depend on several factors such as the number of service accounts, expected loads, and policies not yet decided. However, Table 2-1 provides estimates for these costs based on best CCA practices and estimated load and customer data for the City. Based on the City’s population of 211,000, the CCA may have up to 90,730 service accounts. If these service accounts use energy in a similar way as other California cities, the annual retail sales are estimated at 700,000 MWh. Data from GDS’ (EES) previous Feasibility Study for the entire counties of San Bernardino and Riverside in 2017 indicates that Fontana had a load consumption of nearl y 1,0 00,000 MWh annually which indicates a higher concentration of commercial and industrial accounts (versus residential) than most California cities. Table 2-1 below provides a conceptual estimate of costs to start-up and operate a CCA for a city the size of Fontana based on GDS’ experience.
The 2017 Feasibility Study also indicated annual load consumption of nearly 1,500,000 MWh for the cities of Rancho Cucamonga and Grand Terrace combined. However, based on GDS’ current work in the region, we know additional cities are interested in possibly joining onto the Fontana Feasibility Study effort or the Fontana effort may be combined with an ongoing Feasibility Study initiated by the County of San Bernardino.
Regardless, the cost estimates provided in this section are primarily based on Fontana statistics. Also, these costs will be refined under the Feasibility Study using updated consumption and nu mber of service accounts to be provided by SCE. These values are provided to indicate rough estimates of overall start-up and operation costs for Fontana and to indicate where such costs are attributed. The final Feasibility Study will provide more refined costs based on updated numbers from SCE and updated costs from our Turnkey Team service providers.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 33
TAB LE 2 -1. E STIM ATE D NON -POWER OPER ATIN G C OSTS 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
CCA Phase: Feasibility
Post
Feasibility Start-Up Operation
Consulting Teams
Legal/Regulatory $0 $40,000 $120,000 $140,000 $144,200 $149,000 $153,000 $158,000 Marketing & Outreach $0 $50,000 $150,000 $154,500 $159,000 $164,000 $169,000 $174,000 Technical Consulting $65,000* $100,000 $200,000 $206,000 $212,000 $218,000 $225,000 $232,000 Financial Consulting $0 $0 $50,000 $51,500 $25,000 $26,000 $27,000 $28,000 Accounting Services $0 $0 $50,000 $51,500 $53,000 $55,000 $57,000 $59,000 IT $0 $0 $20,000 $40,000 $41,000 $42,000 $43,000 $44,000 Data Management $0 $0 $0 $1,380,000 $1,390,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,410,000 Customer/Call Center Services $0 $0 $366,558 $200,000 $206,000 $212,000 $218,000 $225,000 Power Procurement/Portfolio Management $0 $0 $200,000 $600,000 $618,000 $637,000 $656,000 $676,000 Scheduling/Dispatch Coordinator $0 $0 $20,000 $360,000 $370,800 $382,000 $393,000 $405,000 Subtotal $65,000* $190,000 $1,176,558 $3,183,500 $3,219,000 $3,285,000 $3,341,000 $3,411,000 CCA Operations Staff
Executive Director $0 $50,000 $250,000 $257,500 $265,000 $273,000 $281,000 $289,000 Account Manager/Communications $0 $80,000 $160,000 $164,800 $170,000 $175,000 $180,000 $185,000 Finance Manager $0 $0 $40,000 $41,200 $42,000 $43,000 $44,000 $45,000 Administrative $10,000* $10,000 $20,000 $20,600 $21,000 $22,000 $23,000 $24,000 Subtotal $10,000* $140,000 $470,000 $484,100 $498,000 $513,000 $528,000 $543,000 Total Non-Power Operating Costs $75,000* $330,000 $1,646,558 $3,667,600 $3,717,000 $3,798,000 $3,869,000 $3,954,000 $/month/customer $0.07 $0.30 $1.50 $3.32 $3.10 $3.17 $3.22 $3.30 Service Accounts 90,730 91,184 91,640 92,098 92,558 93,021 93,486 93,954 $/MWh Retail Sales $0.11 $0.47 $2.34 $5.18 $5.22 $5.31 $5.38 $5.47 *These are typical Feasibility Study costs and are waived for Fontana under this proposal. The Feasibility Study will be done at no charge.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 34
Table 2-1 reflects the estimated cost of the Feasibility Study to be conducted in 2024 . Any costs incurred for the Feasibility Study will be waived regardless of the City ’s decision to mo ve forward with a CCA. Upon that determination, the Post Feasibility consulting costs in 2025 and the Start-up costs in 2026 would need to be financed. Just prior to Operation beginning in 2027 , a banking line of credit to support initial and ongoing CCA operations would need to be established. The Feasibility Study will address , in further detail, the need for Post Feasibility and Start-Up funding and potential sources.
Much, if not all, of the day-to-day CCA operation will be tasked to the consultant team. However, individuals will be needed to manage the team, organize Council Meetings, and facilitate Council decisions. Our proposal includes the cost for consultants to fill these roles (CCA Operations Staff). An individual CCA of similar size would typically hire 4 to 10 FTE with benefits. The costs below represent approximately 2 .25 FTE billed at consultant rates. The initial staffing could be adjusted after the program is up and running at the direction of the City Council.
Table 2-2 below lists the Turnkey Team roles and the Firm, or Team Member. These categories correlate with the budget Table 2-1 above. A brief description of the derivation of the costs for each category is described further below in this section.
TAB L E 2 -2. C C A STAFFIN G AN D FUN CTION S
Firm Example Tasks
Consultant Team
Legal/Regulatory BBK CPUC Filings, Reports on Potential Legislation or Regulatory Items Advertising &
Communications
AAdvantage/TEC Notices, Website, Community Outreach
Technical Consulting GDS Feasibility, Implementation Plan, Rate Setting, Proforma Support, Load Forecast, Technical Data for Regulatory Filings
Financial Consulting Public Finance
Management
Procures and Maintains Banking Services
Accounting Services Maher Budgets, Financial Statements IT TBD Website Design and Management
Data Management Calpine Billing, Customer Service and Call Center Customer Service AAdvantage/TEC Program Administration, CPUC Funding Requests Portfolio Management GDS Power Procurement, Renewable Filings, WREGIS System Management, Integrated Resource Plan, Resource Adequacy Scheduling Coordinator Tenaska Daily Trading and Scheduling CCA Operations Staff TBD by City (if
none, see below)
Day-day Operations and Reporting, Governance Support
Executive Director GDS/AAdvantage Schedules, Manages Tasks, and Policy Adherence, Determines Council Agenda
Account Manager and
Communications
AAdvantage Large or Special Account Services
Finance Manager AAdvantage Prepare Council Agendas/Reports, Facilitate Meetings with Consultants, Receive and Review/Audit Deliverables
Administrative AAdvantage Council Meeting Materials and Facilitation
2.3.1 Initial Feasibility Study/Financial Analysis – Post Feasibility Table 2-1 indicates Feasibility Study costs which GDS is offering at no charge. The Feasibility Study and support to the City are provided to help the City determine whether to implement CCA or not. If CCA implementation is determined, Post Feasibility activities and Start-Up activities would need to be financed. At CCA operations, a banking line of credit is needed to fund initial and ongoing operations. GDS will conduct the Feasibility Study and C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 35
provide Feasibility Study support to the City as part of a City determination on CCA. GDS would conduct the Post Feasibility Study activities – preparing regulatory filings, securing remaining Turnkey Team services – upon a City determination to proceed with CCA.
2.3.2 Wholesale Power Procurement Management
Power Procurement/Portfolio Management from reflects costs to manage the power purchase business element of CCA operations. These estimates come from GDS’ Power Procurement organization and are based on necessary staffing costs to supply and manage a power portfolio for the size of the City.
2.3.3 Schedule/Dispatch Coordinator
Schedule/Dispatch Coordinator costs are provided by Tenaska and are based on a unit cost per MWh of energy needed for the City. These costs reflect a ll of the services described for Tenaska as the Schedule/Dispatch Coordinator described in the Narrative section.
2.3.4 Data Management/Call Center Services
Data Management/Call Center Services costs are provided by Calpine and are based on a unit cost per meter (customer account) needed for the City. These costs reflect all of the services described for Calpine as the Data Management/Call Center Services provider described in the Narrative section.
2.3.5 Marketing and Outreach Services
Marketing and Outreach Services costs are provided by The Energy Coalition and are based on their experience providing similar services for Clean Power Alliance (L.A. County-led CCA) and the Orange County Power Authority CCA. This includes website development and maintenance, customer notifications required by the CPUC, and a minimum amount of regular customer communications and hosted venue events to maintain customer communications.
2.3.6 Legal/Regulatory Services
Legal/Regulatory Services costs are provided by BBK typically and reflect their experience in providing required regulatory filings, responding to CPUC requests, and monitoring CCA-related proceedings at the CPUC. BBK is the GDS Turnkey Team member for this role. As noted earlier, BBK is also Fontana’s contract City Attorney. We will defer to the City on whether to utilize BBK under our Turnkey Team or whether the City desires to use BBK under their City contract.
2.3.7 Financing
GDS has typically used Public Finance Management (PFM), a well-known local government finance consultant, to procure financing and banking lines of credit for CCA Start-up and Operations funding. These are typically loans that PFM secures for CCAs but other potential sources of funding will be described in the final Feasibility Study.
Past costs are reflected in this.
2.3.8 Customer Programs
The Energy Coalition will also provide support for assessing and developing CCA customer programs. This cost estimate is based on their experience with Orange County Power Authority and their experience doing the same for other local governments in acquiring program funding from CA regulatory agencies. The scope is described in the Narrative and in the Value-Added Services section below.
2.3.9 CCA Operations Staff
As noted above, if the City determines no City staff are available to support CCA operations, the GDS Turnkey Team will provide these resources for the costs shown. Primarily, these resources will serve as the technical and financial liaison between the Tu rnkey Team and City electeds and executives – providing update reports, communications, and coordination on meetings and events. These resources will also serve as the liaison between C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 36
the City and customers for certain City -directed communications. Our Team will also serve to coordinate and provide all support for City Council and other public meetings regarding CCA. The budget noted for the Turnkey Team to provide these services are considerably less than typical cities’ staffing to perform the same functions.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 37
3 Value Added Services
The GDS Team will evaluate and recommend additional services which may benefit the City CCA operations including: developing operational cost savings, increasing revenues, enhancing the City CCA public image.
3.1 ASSISTANCE TO HELP RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMERS – CITY CCA PUBLIC IMAGE
CCAs can establish their own retail rates which means for (as of this proposal development) all CCAs in the state – are offering lower retail rates than their incumbent investor-owned utilities. Additionally, CCAs may establish rates to incentivize customer behavior including: developing businesses, implementing solar and battery storage, electrifying infrastructure (with greater revenues for the CCA), and creating customer demand side management programs such as energy efficiency and demand response.
The California Public Utilities Commission provides funding for CCAs for energy efficiency programs and for development of community solar programs that offer renewable energy to low-income customers who otherwise could not afford to implement renewable projects. City residents still qualify for SCE programs whether the City is a CCA or not. Those include SCE’s energy efficiency programs, solar and storage incentives, low income support and subsidy programs, demand response programs, and support for distributed energy resource installations.
Other CCAs in the State offer workforce training programs in partnership with educational institutions and energy industry equipment suppliers. Also, some CCAs offer scholarships for energy industry training programs and advanced degrees. All CCAs in the state offer public events and programs which educate their customers on CCA benefits and activities and provide forums for public input into city energy goals and objectives.
Also, with lower retail customer rates, past economic modeling conducted by GDS for other jurisdictions’ CCA feasibility studies show that job growth is realized through increased spending by retail electric customers due to reduced rates, increased business activity of local businesses due to this increased spending, and increased spending by the employees of these local businesses due to increased activity. Our Team includes this economic analysis in our CCA feasibility study efforts.
GDS is prepared to discuss the opportunities for all of this with the City as your CCA implementer, operator and energy partner.
3.2 BRINGING NEW POWER GENERATION, STORAGE OR DISTRIBUTION TO THE CITY As a CCA, the City procures power supply from a variety of statewide, regional and local sources – wholesale power from marketers, contracts with large power projects in/out of state, and development of CCA -owned power sources using a variety of financing sources including municipal financing (which CCAs in the State are now doing).
As a CCA, the City may also encourage the development of local/regional power sources (solar, storage, solar plus storage) by participating in their development as well as contracting for the power output. This can also be done at customer level renewable and storage projects on rooftops and vacant property.
Absent a CCA, the City may invest in generation resources in the City and region and will have to find a buyer of that power output. Typically, the City, with an energy partner, would identify a potential power generation source and site, determine generation economics, obtain financing, and solicit for “off takers” or buyers of the output.
As a CCA, the City would do all of this and now may consider the option of buying the power itself for supply to the City energy customers and consider financing as a CCA leveraging operating revenues as the source of financing repayment.
Absent operating a CCA, the City may purchase power from third parties through California’s Direct Access programs which allow retail customers to procure power from third parties. The City, as a large power consumer, C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 38
could potentially influence development of resources through purchase of power from its municipal buildings and by influencing other large customers to consider third party purchases. These options are not as comprehensive or secure as a CCA procuring energy for the entire City.
3.3 REGIONAL CCA DEVELOPMENT
Our Team’s experience with developing CCAs and California’s experience show that there are definite economy of scale benefits in operating a CCA; that is, we believe there is a minimum threshold for number of meters (or number of customers or size of energy load) to maximize risk mitigation.
Our Team has been working with the County of San Bernardino and other cities within the County in promoting CCA throughout the region. We have submitted a CCA development proposal to the City of Adelanto who expressed interest in developing a “high desert” region CCA. We have also submitted a proposal to the County of San Bernardino Chief Administrative Office with a proposal for a feasibility study and a proposal to develop and implement a County unincorporated area CCA.
Either through direction from these jurisdictions and/or with direction from the City, our Turnkey Team can initiate regional collaborative efforts including: combining feasibility study results into different combinations of potential regional partners, describing the pros/cons of multiple jurisdiction participation and governance models.
3.4 ELECTRIC SYSTEM GRID RELIABILITY PROGRAMS PARTICIPATION Under the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) regulated authority over transmission systems and under SCE’s regulated authority to operate the local distribution system, both agencies are tasked with evaluating the short -, mid- and long -term reliability and resiliency of those electrical systems. CAISO administers Local Capacity Requirements programs that identify location -specific transmission grid needs for reliability and resiliency. Similarly, SCE administers and operates distribution infrastructure deferral needs programs. Under recent legislation and regulation, both agencies administer programs to solicit and fund distributed energy resource projects, owned and operated by third-parties which are deemed to provide benefits to the grids. These programs represent opportunities for the City to engage directly, or with third -party partners, to identify and facilitate projects within the City that meet program criteria and would result in greater system reliability and resiliency for the grids serving the City.
3.5 PARTICIPATION IN SCE REGULATORY PROCEEDINGS
The Turnkey Team (i.e., BBK, GDS and TEC) is also active at the CPUC in proceedings on behalf of public sector clients – especially CCAs – for the purposes of determining the basis and correctness of utility rates. We have observed many cities in the region specifically highlight SCE’s lack of performance in new customer service installations. Proceedings that involve SCE’s costs, performance and obligations for new services include those mentioned above, SCE’s General Rate Case which sets and approves their system funding requirements, and SCE’s annual distribution system performance report. The Turnkey Team would assess and evaluate the regulatory proceedings under which SCE customer performance would be at issue and whether the City, as a CCA, might influence them.
3.6 ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Under a CCA offering customer rates lower than SCE , the City not only offers customers lower utility costs and lower greenhouse gas accounting for the region , but an economic analysis of the lower rates can show that direct and indirect employment is created. Existing economic development models are available and quantify potential economic impacts of lower customer rates . Employment opportunities are created above and beyond what would have otherwise taken place in the absence of a CCA program due to customer bill savings, expected local spending by the customers due to this saving , and benefits to local businesses of this spending. Standard input/output models used by the State can quantify the direct and indirect creation of jobs due to CCA savings.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C 39
Additionally, local jobs created can be created by the CCA through increased utilization of local generation, local renewables generation, and local jobs related to energy efficiency retrofits.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C A
Appendix A . Corporate Biographies of Turnkey CCA Team GDS Associates, Inc.
GDS Associates has conducted CCA feasibility studies across the state and helped implement multiple CCAs, includes technical resources as described throughout this proposal.
Founded in 1986, GDS provides engineering and consulting services to electric utility clients across the country, covering a broad range of services in the areas of wholesale and retail rates, cost of service (COS), demand-side management, power supply planning, financial consulting, transmission planning, access and pricing, generation development and monitoring, operational and management challenges, and many others.
Cooperatives, municipal systems, and regulatory agencies are GDS’ target clients, and we gear our business toward being able to provide the multitude of services that those entities need “all under one roof”. We serve a diverse client base with a variety of energy consulting services, as well as information technology, market research, and statistical services.
GDS offers a broad array of services with direct, current experience with valuation, and mergers and acquisitions, all of which are relevant to the City’s requested scope of work, including:
– Utility Municipalization & Privatization
– Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Services
– Renewable Resource Procurement &
Advisement
– Microgrid
– Mergers and Acquisitions
– Regulatory
– Cost of Service, Financial Analysis and Rate
Design
– System & Plant Valuations
– Proforma Business Plan and Forecast Retail
Rates
– Engineering Design Services/Construction
Management
– Expert Witness and Regulatory Support
Services
– Strategic Planning
– Resource Development and Assessment
– Energy Purchasing and Risk Management
– Educational Seminars
GDS has assisted clients in meeting the challenges of evolving competitive, regulatory and technical environments.
We have a proven track record of success in arenas where the results of a particular project may have far-reaching effects on the viability of an organization and the local community.
Because of the size of our firm and our highly qualified staff, we are able to deliver results in less time and with less expense to our clients. We are responsive and focused on cost-effective solutions for our clients' needs, and always recommend the mos t direct and efficient means of carrying out a project. The success of our project approach has resulted in the large volume of repeat business that the firm enjoys.
GDS places the needs of our clients first and foremost. The size and depth of our firm permits us to offer clients multiple sources of assistance, ensuring complete, competent, and timely service on a very cost -effective basis.
GDS’ long history of meeting or exceeding client needs has established our reputation within the industry. In fact, most of our project assignments are derived from repeat work for existing clients or from client referrals. GDS recognizes that no two clients or problems are exactly a like, so we strive to deliver “right -fit” solutions for each client’s particular situation. GDS conducts its business in accordance with stated core values which we follow steadfastly in providing services to our clients.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C A
Tenaska Power Services Company
Established in 1997, Tenaska is a FERC -certified power marketing company engaged in the buying and selling of wholesale and retail power and the provision of power marketing and energy management services throughout the United States. With a 200+-person staff headquartered in Irving, Texas, Tenaska focuses on providing energy management solutions to third -party customer generation assets and retail and wholesale load in CAISO, WECC, ERCOT, SERC, MISO, SPP, PJM, NYISO, and ISONE.
As one of the first energy managers in the U.S., Tenaska has grown alongside the electric power industry, adapting to the ever -changing market landscape and developing cross -functional expertise in its employees. Tenaska employs a team of functional experts to provide energy management services to customers in each U.S. power market. Each member of the energy management team, including both commercial and back-office roles, is fully involved in all aspects of their specif ic market function, including participating in stakeholder meetings, market design, and market training. This integrated approach enables each energy management customer to benefit from Tenaska’s extensive market knowledge, deep understanding of the regional energy markets, and ability to execute transactions to provide risk management services and create incremental value.
Tenaska has managed assets for over 300 energy management customers, comprised of independent power producers, municipal electric utilities, electric cooperatives, renewable generation facilities, large industrial and cogeneration facilities, retail loads, demand response participants, and energy storage assets. The vast diversity of Tenaska’s customer base has given Tenaska experience with many different technology types, customer characteristics, and market segments and has well-equipped our team to provide a comprehensive set of energy management services.
Tenaska’s solid reputation as a top -tier energy management firm is also demonstrated by the fact that over twenty-five years ago, Tenaska entered the energy management business with an agreement to provide services to the Brownsville Public Utilities Board ( “BPUB”). Tenaska performs an extensive array of energy management services for BPUB, including energy procurement, risk management, facility optimization, market interface, scheduling, settlement services, and transmission revenue rights optimization. This relationship has evolved and expanded, and we are proud that we continue to serve BPUB today.
While Tenaska is acutely attuned to reliability issues and is extremely sensitive to risk management concerns, Tenaska’s business focus is adding value for its customers. Tenaska’s talented energy management team has a proven record of successfully managing risk and optimizing revenues for generation and load customers.
As a demonstration of Tenaska’s strong focus on providing energy management services, Tenaska maintains a dedicated Energy Management group staffed with experienced energy managers and support personnel. This enables Tenaska to assign a dedicated energy manager to each customer to provide a single point of contact for any customer request.
Each Energy Manager is responsible for working with the customer to develop long and short -term optimization strategies, utilizing information provided by Tenaska’s trading and market analysis groups as well as customer specific parameters to recommend optimization strategies. Upon determination of an optimization strategy with each customer, the Energy Manager will oversee execution of the strategy and monitor its p erformance. The Energy Manager actively seeks opportunities to improve each customer’s economic performance through extracting maximum value from their assets and positions.
Tenaska began operating in California in 2012 and is currently providing Scheduling Coordinator, Energy Management, Optimization and Settlement Services for many customers within the CAISO and WECC footprints.
Tenaska currently provides these services to a number of California CCAs including Clean Power Alliance of Southern California (CPA), San Diego Community Power (SDCP), Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) and Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE). In 2015, Tenaska executed an agreement to provide Energy Management and
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C A
Scheduling Coordinator Services for a generator in CAISO owned by a company that owns multiple generators across the country. As a testament to Tenaska’s excellent customer service, after less than a month of serving the generator, the owner elected to hire Tenaska to serve eight of its other generators in California, as well as an additional six generators outside of California.
Additionally, Tenaska has been extremely active in the California Resource Adequacy (“RA”), Renewable Portfolio Standard (“RPS”), and Carbon Free (“CF”) markets, transacting significant volumes annually. Specifically, Tenaska has transacted in all local and system RA zones (including RA supplies with flexible capacity attributes) in California as well as all bucket type (PCC1, PCC2 and PCC3) products in the RPS market. Tenaska has marketed trading tenors from balance of year to as far out as 10-15 years with our clients.
Calpine Energy Solutions
Calpine is the premier provider of Billing, Data Management, and Customer Service for Community Choice Aggregators ( “CCA”) across California. For more than a decade, our team has helped over 170 local governments bring lower bills, energy choice, and economic development to their communities. We help launch California’s first CCA, MCE Clean Energy, in 2010, and since then helped 22 additional CCAs start -up operations.
Calpine boasts the high billing accuracy of any provider in the nation, with over 99.999% accurate billing, measured across over half a billion bills. As of January 2024, Calpine supports over 5 million meters covering over 20 CCAs nationwide.
Headquartered in San Diego, California, Calpine has over 300 full -time employees with a management team averaging more than 20 years of energy experience. Our company has served California commercial and industrial customers since the market deregulated in 1998. We have over 12 years of experience in billing and data management with California’s CCAs and over twenty years of experience exchanging customer data with California’s utilities in support of this industry. Working with all three investor-owned electric utilities in California has honed our craft; we have built highly sophisticated systems and processes to account for innumerable nuances and brought these hard-earned benefits to all our CCA partners.
Additionally, Calpine maintains our best-in-class status by working with industry leading partners to provide new tools and intelligence to our clients. We are the only provider in the market that offers advanced data analytics, targeting, forecasting, and grid flexibility as-a-service through our partnership with Recurve Analytics. Calpine also brings a wealth of experience in customer behavior and research through our research team and we are the only provider actively working with CCAs to utilize behavioral science to maximize customer participation an d engagement.
Our seasoned background and tenacious drive to improve is how we achieve the highest billing accuracy in the industry, and we firmly believe there is no other vendor in this space as prepared, well-staffed, or as experienced that can also provide the level of technological sophistication and service support to enhance every aspect of a CCA’s operations.
The Energy Coalition
For almost fifty years, TEC has been deeply immersed in the complex and ever - changing energy landscape, helping to shape the solutions of tomorrow while addressing the needs of today. Working with the public sector, TEC designs and delivers projects that c reate shared social, environmental, and economic benefits. We identify and help partners access funding, removing barriers to smart energy strategies. We help cities, counties, school districts, water agencies, Regional Energy Networks (RENs), and Communit y Choice Aggregators (CCAs) with projects that transform energy use and generate much-needed capital. To date, TEC has successfully supported public agencies in securing approximately over $170M in funding from a variety of federal, state, and local agencies.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C A
The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) recently created a new program: the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. This first-of-its-kind program will provide $27 billion in competitive grants for clean energy and climate projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions —with an emphasis on projects that benefit low -income and disadvantaged communities.
The Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act (IIJA) will provide $550 million through the Department of Energy (DOE’s) Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grants (EECBG) to help states, local governments, and tribes reduce energy use, reduce fossil fuel emissions, and improve energy efficiency. IIJA will also provide $500 million through the Department of Energy (DOE’s) Renew America’s Schools program to fund energy improvements at public K-12 school facilities. Improvements cover energy efficiency, ventilation, renewable energy, alternative vehicles, and alternative fuel vehicle infrastructure at one or more school sites located in an areas of high needs.
The California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program (ICARP) is offering $250 million under their Regional Resilience Planning and Implementation Grant Program (RRGP) to help address local, regional, and tribal climate resilience needs at the regional scale. The California Strategic Growth Council’s (SGC) Community Resilience Centers (CRC) program will offer $270 million to fund new construction and upgrades of neighborhood -level resilience centers to provide shelter and resources during climate and other emer gencies. The program will also fund year -round services and ongoing programming that build overall community resilience. The California Strategic Growth Council’s (SGC) Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) program will release the 5th round of awards providing over $163 million across planning grants, project development grants and implementation grants to fund development and infrastructure projects that achieve major environmental, health, and economic benefits in California’s most disadvantaged communities.
TEC offers extensive experience and expertise in regulatory activities drawn from over twenty years of serving as implementers for various California EE programs. TEC has managed regulatory and data reporting requirements in compliance with California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) specifications, responding to program evaluation, measurement, and verification (EM&V) related data requests, and adapting programs in response to relevant regulatory proceedings. Furthermore, TEC has provided support to Prog ram Administrators with various duties including drafting Business Plans and Program Implementation Plans (IPs), preparing and submitting budget advice letters, providing comments to relevant CPUC proceedings, and compiling required annual, quarterly, and monthly CPUC reports. TEC participates as a member of the California Energy Efficiency Coordinating Committee (CAEECC) and is a party to multiple CPUC proceedings. TEC is also represented on the Board of Directors of the Local Government Sustainable Energy Coalition, helping craft and coordinate strategies and opportunities for local governments to be energy leaders and influence statewide energy policies. Specific project experience is listed below.
Best Best & Krieger (“BBK”)
Established in 1891, Best Best & Krieger, LLP (“BBK”) is a full-service public agency law firm with over 250 attorneys and 12 offices nationwide, with attorneys licensed and clients in Arizona including the City of Lake Havasu. Our attorneys are especially well qualified to provide the highest quality legal representation.
Our professionals focus on virtually all practices of law that may confront a public agency. We help public clients successfully maneuver through legal complexities and government mandates. Because BBK has a history of extensive involvement in all aspects of p ublic law, we have pioneered methods to deliver advisory, regulatory, transactional and litigation services in a comprehensive, efficient, and cost -effective manner. BBK currently provides legal services to over 700 public agency clients in various capacities.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C A
BBK offers strategic counsel to clients throughout California and the U.S. on utilities regulation, administrative law, environmental law and public agency governance matters. Their energy practice spans regulatory, transactional and business issues in the areas of energy, gas, water quality, air quality, wastewater, solid waste and climate change. They also has extensive experience with project development, entitlement and permitting matters, particularly with respect to large-scale infrastructure. BBK represents clients on utility matters before a number of federal and state agencies as well as on utility transactional, business and governance matters. He represents a number of California community choice aggregators, commonly known as CCAs, and communitie s exploring CCA on all aspects of formation. This includes governance, implementation, regulatory and procurement matters. BBK advises clients on forming electric municipal owned utilities and acquiring utility assets, including recent efforts in Colorado. They negotiate regularly with utility companies and advise on utility rules and tariffs.
BBK advises community choice aggregators on feasibility, formation and implementation, including creation of enterprise funds and joint powers agencies, consultant contracts, energy and resource adequacy procurement, and CPUC and CEC regulation. Clients in clude Western Community Energy, Desert Community Energy, Clean Power Alliance, San Jose Clean Energy, San Jacinto Power, the County of San Diego and various cities and counties exploring CCA or joining an existing CCA.
Aadvantage Communications
Founded in 2015, AAdvantage Communications is government relations, public policy and research advisory firm based in Southern California (San Bernardino) . Established on the core foundation of knowledge, data, and experience, AAdvantage Communications works collaboratively with clients and partners to deliver results.
With passionate strides about the work we do, we are vested in positively impacting people’s lives and contributing to the communities in which we work through data guided strategies and lobbying efforts to garner trust and support for our clients desired outcomes.
Our focus and precision approach allows consideration for unique and tailored efforts and an awareness of client and community needs which are steadfast in our dedication to each project and its outcomes.
Our history of proven success and long-lasting relationships with clients and colleagues has yielded the trust and loyalty of these partnerships. Most importantly, AAdvantage Communications work has always been built on a foundation of relationships with federal, state, county and local government officials.
Our research coupled with a pragmatic approach affords us the ability to offer clients educated and objective guidance based on reliable professional and seasoned experience in these specialty areas such as: Government Relations, Public Policy, Market Research, Sales/Marketing, Sales Targeting/Brand Development, Public Affairs, Crisis Management, Community Engagement and Focus Groups.
We also offer advising in economic and community development along with land use and development, and formation of public private partnership (PPP) efforts through JPA formation (joint powers authority and quasi - government formation) through land annexation.
Our commitment i s founded upon objectivity, diligence, care, and profitability for our clients. Our approach is designed to exceed the expectations of our clients and their strategic growth plans. From AAdvantage Communications, our commitment and dedication are centered around:
Clear communication, strict timelines, and a dedicated team to achieve your goals. Integration as part of your team, in a collaborative manner, to facilitate transparency and accountability in all that we do to deliver core objectives.
Frequent meetings will be scheduled to address successes, concerns, updates, and opportunities to continue to move projects forward towards the end objectives.
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C B
Appendix B. Resumes
C I T Y O F F O N T A N A Proposal for Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Formation and Operation REV ISIO N 1 08 .07 . 24
prepared by G D S A S S O C I A T E S I N C C
Appendix C. Financial Information