renewable energy goal and feature local renewable energy resource development. an accelerated case where we see the impact of renewable five years sooner by 2025 and featuring local renewable development. a portfolio that emphasizes matching renewable energy produced with customer electricities in real time is the third one. this portfolio would be designed to minimize the use of the grid to help manage the natural variability of our renewable energy supply and lastly a california p.u.c. required case that meets clean power s.f. share of the state 2030, co2 emission target for 46 million metric tons of co2. as you all know, change is a

constant. people's habits an preferences and city and state policy always changing and they'll have an impact on the electricity demand in san francisco. we used the i.r.p. to plan for changes that influence electricity demand and then identify how those changes influence the electricity supply portfolios we're modeling. our current work is focussed on analyzing two sensitivities. what if 100% of new vehicle registration in 2030 are electric vehicles. and what if all new construction in san francisco is 100% electric. for our work now we're assuming that would occur starting in 2024. after we complete our analysis, staff will recommend our preferred portfolio for the commission to adopt and that will be submitted to the california p.u.c.

the preferred portfolio will tie together our sensitivity analysis, findings from our local renewables report which we submitted to the commission in february and city and state policy goals. what we submit will serve as a resource road map for clean power s.f. purchasing and developing activities an meet program goals through 2030. we must submit an i.r.p. every two years but we'll continue to evaluate our portfolio and plan going forward. in these future i.r.p.s we'll take into account new information regarding electricity demand, local and state policy changes, renewable energy technology and market trends and of course new local resource development opportunities. we've also been engaging with the community around our i.r.p. at the beginning of the month we

held two virtual community workshop to provide updates to stakeholders. they were well attended with 19 participants representing 13 organizations. we used the meetings as an opportunity to highlight the local energy report as well as the i.r.p. process we have underway. we also shared information on marketing and outreach and covid-19 relief measures, state policy issues and the city's public power initiative. i think by most measures it was a success given the virtual aspect of the meeting. so what's next? we are currently finalizing our modelling work and preparing a written plan with our recommendation for preferred portfolio brought to you for approval at the august 25 meeting.

prior to that meeting, we'll solicit comments from the public on our i.r.p. results and recommendation. following commission approval, we will submit the plan with our preferred portfolio to the california p.u.c. by september 21. and that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> commissioner: commissioners, questions? >> commissioner: mike, in the ven diagram you showed [audio digitizing] in the program design we were

driving towards the sweet spot. the investment piece is important also but i thought that was more in the cost bucket or maybe there's a fourth bucket that needs to be created because i'm curious about the job creation this program is promising. >> commissioner, you broke up at the beginning but i think you're asking on slide 4 that shows the objectives, the jobs aspect of local investment? >> >> commissioner: correct. >> do view those as linked together because jobs are a byproduct of local investment. it's not just local investment,

operating the program creates jobs. in tying our activities as it relates to new clean energy investments and jobs, that is what we're referring to in the circle. i'm happy to come back and talk more about the jobs that have been created by the program holistically as well. >> commissioner: i would love to learn more and i know we talked about operationally how jobs have been created through the program but i'm interested in the green energy jobs potentially be created. especially when you talk about what's coming down the pike with [audio digitizing]

. my hope is clean power s.f. continues to be a driver and know software and -- or the hardware and the software of the people power also. >> yeah. you were breaking up again but i think i got the gift -- gist of it and one comment very interested in talking more with you about this. i think onest of it and one comment very interested in talking more with you about this. i think one thing we're careful of look at direct and indirect job creation and there's an economy around clean energy.

of course clean power s.f. is the supplier of the electricity and there are things we do that are more direct that may result in job creations. others and i just want to take poi point. >> commissioner: i still want to get in the weeds. even indirectly we're responsible and if we don't make more -- if we're not more responsible we can make anybody else responsible. i think it's important we do that as well. and there was a slide where you had sensitivity. i'm not sure which one that was.

what are we being sensitive too? i see that a lot. i'm not sure what it means. >> i appreciate that. the term we're using is related to the analytical work we're doing and it's changing one variable in the model that we're running. so think of this work as they're actually multiple stages in it. think of it in many ways a big

mac problem. we're running software that analyzes a bunch of variables like the renewable energy supply of different technologies, the cost. when san francisco uses electricity when we're projecting san francisco will use electricity. and a sensitivity is, well, what if we change one of these variables. how does that affect the outcome? the variables we're focussing on for our sensitivity analysis in this work is changes to san francisco's demand as a result of some of the decarbonization policies we're expecting will change consumer behavior. and one of those is electric vehicles and another that we're ing is building energy use.

moving from natural gas to electric-only buildings. does that help answer your question? >> commissioner: not really. i just think when you're using terms like that i'm not familiar and i would rather have it -- because i think it's important. i want to know more. i think i would like to have that spelled out a little bit more and then i can getized -- get used to seeing its -- it.

>> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,used. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,seei. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,ts -. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,s --. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysi -- it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,-- i. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysi it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis, it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis, anyway, when you say it was good what are you looking for and when we say community participation, we should have some idea what we'd like to see. and then we can all know whether it was good or not. there's a base. just to say it was good and maybe there's five people, i would just like to have a little bit more of a clear idea where we're trying to go when we say community participation. >> okay.

i can provide initial response but you may recall, commissioner, we provided a list initially to have the meetings probably when we were expecting to do this in person. i don't have at my fingertips the full count of organizations but it was a pretty long list. i would say probably 30% or 40% of the organizations under that participating i think our goal with the meetings was one, we wanted to introduce what we were doing with the i.r.p. and share work done with respect to local

renewables but we also wanted to ice the opportunity to sort of introduce clean power s.f. to a bunch of organizations within the community that may not have been all that familiar with what we're doing. so we did provide an overview of what we've been up to with clean power s.f. over the past couple of years. we provided opportunities for breakout discussions and our goal in that breakout discussion was really to hear more from the attendees about where their interests might intersect with the work we do to learn from that and think how to better engage with the community. so i think we made progress on that. we also wanted to provide an opportunity for questioning for

members of the community to ask us questions about the work we're doing. i think we succeeded in that. i wouldn't say it was perfect but it was a successful first effort especially given the virtual world we've been operating in. >> commissioner: that's good. thank you. that's adequate. thank you very much. >> commissioner: any more comments? i have a question on slide number 3. it's something i don't think i'll ever learn or understand. are you saying on the graph that large hydro isn't going to count? is that what you said?

>> thanks for asking that. we review large hydro as renewable but the state of california in create the renewable standard program which was intended to increase the development of renewable energy technologies and shift the state more towards those technologies, does not count certain hydro electric facilities as eligible for that program. there's just a distinction between the state's view of what is eligible for renewable. we'd like to refer to it as big r renewable versus little r renewable which is generally a renewable resource that is clean that does not emit greenhouse gases, for example.

so we are including large hydro electric as a resource option in our modelling. what we wanted to show is the green bar are a floor for technologies only eligible for the california state program. the blue portion could include resource s that are eligible and hydro electric. both types meet the city's goal of decarbonizing the system. does that help? >> commissioner: truthfully, i don't think i'll ever understand. it doesn't make sense to me. i thought the state reversed

that and now accept large hydro. >> there are some exceptions. there's a threshold related to the size of the facility. the state for example, considers in its program efficiency improvements to even the large lands that were previously not eligible as eligible. hydro is an interesting one in the state's program. there are a lot of conditions and rules. the message we're trying to communicate here is fairly simple is that for that sort of 30ish percent of the portfolio

when conducting analysis we're allowing large hydro to be in the mix. >> commissioner: okay. so we're allowing it? >> yes, we're allowing it to be part of our supply mix and targeting the 30% as the potential share. our modelling effort is cost and to drive the outcome. we're looking for the best resource to meet the goals that clean power s.f. needs and what the commission said forth for clean power s.f. >> commissioner: okay then i'm getting closer on understanding it.

thank you for your explanation. madame secretary, call for public comment. >> clerk: members of the pub public who wish to comment on 6c dial 1-888-273-3658 and access code 3107452 then and pound then pound again and then 1 and 0 to be added to the speaker line.

do we have callers? >> we have several callers. >> caller: thank you for the presentation we look forward to commenting on which particular scenario goes forward. and it's like changing one dial to see the change. we're doing our best to make

sure all is electric. we encourage more regular power update readings. other have their on a regular standing basis for stakeholders or at least some do. a great example is nce. i encourage you to look on their website the community power collision includes basically all community stakeholders in their territory that engage with them.

[chime] >> clerk: you're time has expired. >> caller: thank you. i'll use she and her. this is important and i'm looking forward to the detailed plan to be presented that will be submitted to the p.u.c. i'm looking forward to reading that. i think we need to take an aggressive stance for our acquisition of renewables i'm supportive of a building electr electr

electricification of vehicles and so i want us to have more to go forward. i heard a debate about hydro electric. that is greenhouse gas free. as an agency and brand our renewable should be based on solar and wind so we don't have the questioning over does high dry qualify. it's clear cut and look at geothermal. let's bring it forward but we need to be aspirational in acquiri acquiring purely renewable resources. thank you.

>> clerk: do we have other callers? >> there's one. >> caller: hi, commissioners. this is melissa whyu i'm an organizer with the sierra club. we appreciate your continuedyu organizer with the sierra club. we appreciate your continuedyu organizer with the sierra club. we appreciate your continued engagement with stakeholders and support and i just want to make one additional comment we recommend you look at a lower metric ton. thank you for the opportunity to speak.

>> clerk: thank you. are you further callers? >> no other callers. >> clerk: public comment on item 6c is closed, madame president. the next is 6d the delegation of authority report. >> this is craig lyman and currently monitoring the meeting so i will be presenting this at this time. >> clerk: thank you. as you can see there's one item, one contract on the list that was a sole source contract. this contract between the month of april and june was a $6,000

contract with green energy annual verification process the super green product offering. a five-point contract. because the contract was less than $10,000 no competitive solicitation was required however, in the interest of fairness we performed an informal solicitation by reaching out and questioned folks who applied. one we entered into a contract with. the other indicated they were not interested in performing the work. that completes my report. >> commissioner: commissioners, any discussion, questions? madame secretary, can you please open it up to public comment.

>> clerk: members who wish to provide public comment on item 6d dial 1-888-273-3658 access code 3107452 and and pound then pound again and 1 then 0 to be added to the speaker line. do we have any callers? >> madame secretary, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item 6d is closed. the next item is 6e water ent price capital improvement program report.

>> i'm going to share highlights from the water enterprise third quarter report on work performed january through march. [please stand by]

>> : the program has a cheefed d 35% completion. inspection of the beta vision pipeline number two was performed on the city valve lot and found to be in good condition which will significantly reduce the scope of work for that project. the reservoir improvements continued in final design.

anticipated to be advertised very soon. as i explained before, minor interruptions were experienced at the end of the first quarter due to the shelter in place. i'll walk through some highlights to go over some of the great work going on out there. this scaffation is bein ex scaf.

>> that will be construction out there around the same period. next slide, please. in january 2020, sft c submitted a letter to the safety of damns including a commitment and draft scheduled to our 18 u unregulatd damns. the water enterprise vip will

additionally address the damns in the regional system as well as damns in the local system. this highlights some of the improvements happening now, and these will be going on for quite some time. next slide, please. for the san francisco ground water supply project for the park. phase two construction of these wells were 90% complete in the third quarter. the bottom photo of a worker wearing a mask during the third quarter. these wells will be converted for potable use. that brings us to the west side

recycle water project. the treatment facility at the ocean side water control plant is for than 50% complete in march. the top photo shows the concrete walls and some of the piping that's being constructed. this project has made significant progress in the last six months. the pump station shown until the bottom foe oh photos is more th% complete. we can also see workers working with mafng masks on. main replacement continues to replace one hundred to one hundred fifty year old drinking water pipes in san francisco streets. at the end of the third quarter seven miles of pipe have been replaced for the year. sneak peek of the last quarter,

due to the reduced traffic in san francisco due to covid 19 an additional six miles was replaced for a total of twelve point two miles. this is the c bd staff working with masks due to our covid situation. improvements on our fire fighting water station continues. this is anticipated to be completed at the end of 2020. this is a graph of pump station number two. there's been significant tearing out of old and retro fitting of improvements. the supply contract was advertised during the third quarter. nineteenth avenue street quarter contract was awarded during this quarter. this includes two blocks of efsw pipes and tw potable pipeline.

with that, that completes my presentation but i'm happy to take any questions. >> commissioners, questions. >> i have an observation to make. on the front page of the presentation, it says-it should be noted that this report does not include all the expenditures accrued for the work completed from july 1, 2017 through march 31, 2020. that's three years. i'm just baffled why we don't have those expenditures in. that doesn't make any sense to me at all. >> i can take a stab at that-

>> your third paragraph. >> when the people converted to people software from fema all the previous data needed to be updated. i believe we have that completely updated except for the reports from other city departments when they do work. unfortunately we still don't have a good way of receiving accurate information from other city departments through the people soft system. i believe that is the oh only remaining discrepancy that's left to resolve. i believe most use of our project controls is anxious to work on that but it's been a long standing problem.

i believe kathy can probably speak to that in a little more detail. except for those interdepartment transfers, the reporting is accurate. that's my understanding. >> i feel it's been three years. there has to be some accountability on that. >> can i get back to you with some feedback on that? >> sure. that would be fine. >> : kathy would you like to say anything about it. kathy, we can't hear you. >> : i just want to say that we havwant it to say thatwe have ar

department's at the level. it's not a project by project level. that's the way they have the project set up at their end. we've been try to go woring to h their finance team to help us recover those charges. we do have it on a no program level just not by individual projects. >> okay. when do you think that will all come together?

>> also. what we could do is give a number for the overall program and not break it down. we know what the number is for the overall program. we like to have it project by project so we can monitor which projects and what their costs are. when they convert it, they didn't convert it the same way we convert it. that's why we doapt hav don't he details like we used to have. we have it for the whole program. maybe we put that overall number in there so at least at the program level that number would be accurate. >> well, that would be a start. perhaps it should go on an ongoing list of things to look

into. >> since we converted from famous to people soft we've been working closely with the controller an everyone. actually they've made some major strides in working with us, there were some other major issues at the close of the fiscal year that would definitely slowed up construction. but we work collectively with them. i feel comfortable and confidence that we will resolve this issue, it will take a little time. we will put it on the list. we'll give you an idea of when we hope to resolve this issue with public works. >> i'm still saying three years

is a long time. >> it's a long list. it was a very long list. >> i agree with you. >> all right. any other comments? thank you for your report. >> thank you. >> madam secretary, could you please open it up to public comment. >> member of the public who wish to provide two minutes of comment for item e, please dial in and pound followed by pound

again. one and steer to b and zero to e speaker line. >> do we have any speakers in the queue? >> there are no speaker nz these queue. >> closure planning and committee engagement. >> good afternoon commissioners. i hope you can hear me. i apologize-can i get the power point up?

project manager. i'm here today to provide you a brief update on the closure of gerald avenue. the reason for the closure during construction is to ensure safety, efficiency and security. the start of the closure will be no earlier than january 2021. i know at the june commission meeting we did state in the fall which was premature on our fault.

the major construction work on this project necessar necessitan this project. there will be significant number of construction vehicles and workers crossing gerald daily.

we've identified a number of tools to notify of the cloases you're. of the clez closure. we're going to ensure that the detour roads are in good condition and very drivable. if a particular intersection is congestion like during a peak commute hour, we can change the timing of traffic signal as accordingly. a separate travel route for construction trucks sm we truck. we continue to monitor as needed

during construction. next slide, please. here is a summary of our approach for the gerald closure. we conducted a traffic analysis as a part of our project planning and eir evaluation and obtained early comments from the community. the yellow box where we are today we're working with the construction contractor who is already on board about the activities and schedule. we're confirming detour routes and taking into account existing site and neighboring conditions including other construction job that's are happen inning the area. we are evaluating the feasibility of reopening gerald

during non construction hours. a partial or full closure as the construction activity increases. in doing all of that engaging the community in our plans and siem taiwe'll clearly communicat we're planning and give

feedback. ultimately by the time we close gerald the community will be informed on how to navigate the closure. we're committed to monitor the task aretraffic area around the construction area. that ends my brief update. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. i also have our director of communications if there's any specific ow reac out reach quess well. >> commissioners, questions? commissioner maxwell, you were the one very much engaged with this question. do you have any questions?

have i lost everyone? >> i show commissioner maxwell is showing on the meeting. i don't see her video, however. >> okay. any comments or questions on this item? hearing none, could you please open it to- >> i just wanted to let you know that we met with commissioner maxwell and gave her the presentation. she provided input. she wanted to make sure that we

presented our plan at the commission meeting so the community knows what our plans are. >> oh, good. that answers my question. madam, secretary could you please open it to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to provide public comment please dial (888)273-3658 follow the instructions to be added to

the listening queue. >> we had a discussion about this some time ago and-this is the type of mickey mouse that is happening with the san francisco

commissioners. mickey mouse. we need representation. i mean, this is sickening. this is really sickening because as the fbi is going so deeply into the general manager, th whs happening at treasure island. there's not even a small project that we have standard. and missing is ethics and morals. what example-i know some of you are here for many years. when are we going to put things on track? when are we going to have some standards? when? some other method is going to

come through the board of supervisors. >> thank you. your time is expired. mr. moderator do we have any other caller ns in the queue. >> there are no other callers in the queue. >> could you make a comment. i'm curious who the point person-i can anticipate with this project and the road closure there will be a lot of community members with questions, i'm wondering if it's been very clear who the staff person or people at the pu c will be to receive those comments ancomments and if therr that people can call or form of communication. i can just imagine that folks

would want someone to be able to address their concerns to. maybe that's a question for the general manager, i don't know. >> we have presented a communication and out reach plan. i don't know if tyler wants to speak on it. >> that's a great question, commissioner. i think there will be a couple points of contact depending if it's the question people have. if it's a question about the closure itself or the conversations leading up to it. we have a team on the ground at the plant that has some great relationships in the neighborhood, regular e-mail and other communications going out. i can provide the commission with the name and names of those

people on the team and any information that we're putting out to the public in terms of an eight hundred number or general e-mail they can send things to, i can bring that back to you guys. >> that's would be great. i highly recommend that people know who they can speak to and what number they can call. >> we plan to go door to door as well. because she thought that was very important to go and knock on everyone's doors. >> good. any oarmin other comments?

any other speakers in the queue? okay sm the nex. the next item on the general manager's report. 6g. deputy manager, do you have any ieitems to report for item 6g? >> no. that's the end of my report. thank you. >> let's check the time here. if we're going to take a break. why don't we do one more item. item seven. >> item seven is the ocean bea

beach. >> i'm a project manager with a focus on climate change related efforts. if you could put up my presentation. i'm of the project manager for the ocean beach climate change project. i'm here today to provide a brief update on the project in response to the letter you received in the san francisco surf rider foundation. the letter was e-mailed to the commission on may 14th 2020. as a result you've requested an update. the letter asked that the city in light of the uppacts no impae

climate adaptation project should remain a priority due to the alarming rates of erosion. i'm here today that this project continues to be a priority for the sfpu c. the letter of erosion it refers to is at the southern end of ocean beach. the tunnel depicted by the blue line is the piece of equipment that all of the infrastructure is at risk if we don't address the water level rise due to erosion. the anticipated changes to

traffic flow and open space and coastal access amenities. as such the sfpu c declinate ded three phases. the long term project that is currently being developed. the short term improvements remove excess sand from north ocean beach to south ocean beach where we have this infrastructure.

>> speaker: .we anticipate thate placed in this area next year. for the long term improvements. this work started with the development of the ocean beach master plan. once that was done a number of other critical steps have been completed including the latest mile stone of the engineering report. the main objectives of the long term projects include adapting to climate change, protecting critical waste water infrastructure and protecting

water and habitat. in order to meet these objectives this will permanently close the skyline. it will change how people dpet iget inand out of the san franco zoo. it's necessary to address climate change and creating open space amenities. this is an example of the conceptual engineering drawings that were developed. each cross section drawing proposed where the wall will be placed in orde to protect the tunnel. conceptual engineering was completed late last year and now we're on the conceptual design

package. we're also planning for an developing the schematics needed to construct the open space and public components. there are a number of competing needs that must be accommodated in this very limited space. the main access to our facilities, pedestrian and bike trail, rest rooms, parking, emergency vehicle access and the ability to get the necessary equipment into this area to get sand into the beach. it's a tall order and requires a number of agencies to participate. we've managed to move from a rather simple cartoon looking schematic to this layout that is meeting this long list of

requirements. we expect to finish 35% design in the next few months. based on our current schedule we anticipate this project will take four years to construct. in order to meet that schedule we'll need to complete both seqa and nepa. that completes my brief update on the ocean beach adaptation project. i wanted to circle back to one of the main statements in the surf rider letter where they ask that the city not lose sight

dealing with the climate change and covid 19. the city departments can maximize efficiencies and maximize dollars. integration program charter that will govern city actions going forward. as you can see here the sfpu sfs a core agency to further the city's response due to climate

change. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> commissioners, any comments or questions? >> i would just like to say i'm trilled to see this project at this point and that there's a time line and commitment to make it happen. thank you for making this happen after many many years. >> i'm excited to see all this work going in with multiple departments, i mean, i think we all lived in the city so long. you wake up and the weather report is ocean beach is closed today, this is closed today. you know, people have to be thinking smartly and i think you

an your team and others are really-i do have one question. from the slope passed park mer c ed how long do you anticipate that route being closed down? i know when you said 2027 is when the anticipated finishing is from design to actual finished construction, how long would that be shut down? that route? >> are you speaking of 35 or could you clarify- >> everything from the skyline that you are showing me right now. >> that's a permanent closure. that's part of why this project

including sfmt. from slope to skyline will be permanently closed. >> got it. okay. >> okay. >> just real quick summary, i don't want to get into th weeds. the traffic design going from the end of san francisco down to daily city and all the other stuff, what is that going to be? people have to good through 19th avenue? >> we're working with sfmta on a larger area and how traffic will be rerouted and encouraging drivers to get off before they do reach slope.

you will no longer be able to continue on the great highway. it will be redesigned to allow for safe pedestrian and bicycle crossing. it will have what we're planning for is a new entry point to this asset for a beautiful open space. that's where the traffic will switch from being able to continue along the great highway and will be forced to turn on sloat. you will no longer be able to turn left onto the great highway unless you are an employee and going to one of our facilities. there's a new public parking lot where folks can park and access the coastal amenities on what

used to be the great highway. >> got it. that's a great question. sloat will turn from most likely a lazy street except for sundays with people going to the zoo into a major thorough fare where they can get bottled up. i assume that's part of what the consequences of fixing all of this stuff. par pr that's correct. we did a pretty big traffic study. taking advantage of the closure when there was sand on the highway to how drivers will react to that. all of that information is being

taken into account when coming up with a design. looking at opportunities further back closer to lincoln to encourage drivers not to come down the great highway of their alternate destination is skyline or going further south of san francisco. >> got it. i don't want my comments to say that all i care about it cars, because i deaf netl definitely . this is a line in the sand. this is shut down of final design of going through process. this is just eliminated as a traffic route. in order to do the inevitable climate change work that you guys are doing such a diligent job of taking care of. is that a good blow up summary.

>> yes, it is, sir. thank you. >> i have a question. i'm curious to know why the port is involved with this. >> the port is not involved with the master plan and ocean beach climate adaptation master plan. the port is looking at the broader efforts across the city. the port is not involved with this particular project. >> i see. okay. any other comments before we go to public comment? madam secretary could you call for public comment, please. >> members of the public who wish to provide public comment on item seven please call in.

>> there are no callers in the queue. >> we'll take one more item and then we'll take a recess. item eight, please. >> item eight is the water supply and conservation update. >> good afternoon,

commissioners. i want to report to you on an audit that was recently completed by os c a. when you look at asset management, there's a lot of definitions. one that i like is a coordinated approach to managing the physical assets. in this case the pipes and damns and all the pieces of the regional water system to minimize expenditures while maximizing the useful life of that asset. this audit including a thorough

review of the existing pu c documents. the draft report was shared with the staff in this effort. their comments were incorporated and the puc received the final report. next slide, please.

the audit report focuses on a number of conclusions. the puc embraces the basic principles of water management and water and power divisions. guiding direction exists at the management level. there are differences between the two divisions and i think

that's not surprising given the differences in facilities used, the age of the facilities and the management of the facilities has come up over time. that was one of the things that was noted. next slide, please. rot report also presents general recommendations. the puc develop a uniform approach to risk that would be used for both the water supply division as part of the puc's overall asset management work. the report also references a risk framework and assessment tool by water an power. based on recent conversation with puc staff, the report recommends that water supply and treatment seems like there may

be some additional better tool available. i look forward to better conversations with puc staff on that. several other recommendations are provided for the one to three year time window. having water and power and supply and treatment divisions adopt the same standards to bring them both into alignment together. a commitment to review and update asset registries for five year intervals. asset registry is a list of all the assets being managed and maintained. for a system of your size, that is a significant effort in it of itself. formulizing the approach across the utility and reviewing and updating the current policy. there are also eleven other recommendations listed in the outer time years. but again, from my experience

tend to be things we continue to review as time goes on. next slide, please. as you can imagine your whole sub customers who have invested in this system are seriously interest inned this ris issue, e of your efforts and want to make sure this is something done to standards and above. for example, the water supply agreement requires the p c to adopt a policy by this december. my understanding is that proposed policy is included in an upcoming draft report provided to us in early august.

we look forward to engage withing that and this commission. we intend to engage actively in that policy's significance as we look forward to this implementation. provide regular updates to the board and to our member agencies. i really want to thank the executive team for it's leadership on these matters. it's been critical in moving forward. lastly, the audit report itself is posted on our website. that concludes my comments. i'll certainly answer any comments you might have. >> commissioners, any comments

questions? madam secretary, could you please open this to public comment. >> members of puck lick wh publo provide two minutes of public comment please dial (888)273-3658 press pound and pound again. dial one and zero to be added to the speaker line. mr. moderator do we have any callers in the queue? >> madam secretary, we don't have any callers in the queue at this time. >> public comment on this matter

is now closed. we are now going to take a brief recess. please return at five minutes after four for the continuation of

calendar. there is no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission or public so requests and it will be removed from the consent calendar and moved as a separate item. >> commissioners, any discussion. madam secretary, will you open this up to the public for comment. >> member of the public if you wish to provide a two minute comment please dial the number

listed and follow the instructions for public comment. >> there are no callers in the queue at this point. >> thank you. public comment for this item is now closed. >> may i have a motion and a second for the consent calendar. >> motion. >> second. >> madam secretary, will you take a roll call vote. >> (roll call) motion carries. next item, please.

>> next item is item 11 authorized clean power for customers enrolled in the clean energy for low income families december 30, 2020. this will be presented by mr. hines. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. can you hear me? >> yes. >> i was able to get my video working. very excited. as you know, these are tough times we're going through with covid 19. in fact, we've seen a significant increase in the number of clean power electricity customers.

customers enrolled in the discount programs. the proposed credits cover roughly one month's credit. that is single family, multi family residential customers and small business cuf customers. less operational complexity and better transparency to our

customers when compared to a percentage based discount. percentage based discounts are more difficult to apply given that power shares a bill with bg anpgand e and requires budget changes that could delay our implementation of this kind of a relief measure. if you adopt this action, the credits will appear on our customer's bills in the month of october. we will continue to conduct out reach so they will receive the credit and give them a regular discount on their energy bills. with that i'm happy to take my questions you may have. >> any questions, comments? >> do we know how much we have

budgeted for this since we have an idea of who the customers are? how much this is going to cost us overall? >> yes, we do. we're estimating this will reduce clean power revenues by three point two million dollars in fiscal year 2021. we've estimated that including a continued growth in the enrollment in the care and fair program. >> the new thing is a one time, they can participate at anytime they choose for one time? >> no. we're targeting one month of implementation. we have about 40000 customers

currently enrolled. our enrollment has been growing since covid 19 began. we've been promoting this discount program. we want to it use this bill credit to provide some additional immediate relief to these customers. we also think that it has an additional public policy benefit which is to try to encourage more customer that's may qualify to sign up. we get as many customers that are eligible in san francisco-and they will benefit from ongoing bill discounts on their energy bills. court so d>> so did you have ton

enrolled for some time for this benefit? >> that's part of the reason why we're recommending october. one, october is not too far off, it gives us the opportunity to provide relief quickly. and it gives us a couple months to get more customers enrolled. the ject i eligibility is that e customer is enrolled by september. >> if i enroll september 29th i'm eligible for the october- >> yes. >> okay. thank you. >> are the credits in any way proportional to the amount of injury that individual customers use? >> we're proposing a fixed

dollar amount be credited base on the average usage of customers in classes we've looked at customers enrolled in the three groups i mentioned earlier, we calculated what their approximate monthly bills would be for full electricity service and we're proposing that the bill credit be a set of the average value. it's not proportional to individual's customer usage. >> but it is by class? >> yes, it's relative to the average customer usage. >> how much disparity is there in the classes?

what i mean is a flower shop may not use as much energy as another business. are the classes variable enough? >> there is some variability. we're targeting customer class, there's some amount of, i guess, homo general ait

homogeneity in the class. >> thank you. >> any other comments, questions? could you open this to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 11 dial (888)273-3658 access code three 310-6452.

>> we have one caller in the queue. >> thank you. >> thank you, members. this is very important, electricity is really important, i support the idea of a fixed credit which certainly recognizes the needs of those who because of their situation can't buy a whole lot of electricity. these are challenging times. i think we have an imperative using this policy of allowing enrollment to reach out to those who would be eligible for care whether they are in power sf or not. that way they can all take advantage of this benefit. this is what public power is all

about. it's for the people. this is worthy of your approval. i hope that you will do this, thank you. >> there are no more callers, thank you. >> thank you. public comment on item 11 is closed. >> may i have a motion. motion for item 11. >> second. >> madam secretary, will you please take a roll call vote. >> (roll call).

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm the rates commissioner-suspend all watt ir and power shut off due to non payment. this suspension was part of the mayor's emergency declaration for covid 19. it's since been extended twice given that there's a continued state of emergency in san francisco. it's been five months since the

start of the local state of emergency. as i'm sure you're all aware, we're still seeing high transmission rates of the virus, we have hospitalization rates continuing to rise breaking errors in san francisco. water for hand washing is an essential mitigation effort for limiting the transmission of the disease. it's impossible for families to stay home and remain socially distant if their home doesn't have water or power. in the last few years, we average around 1200 shut offs a year. around five thousand customers

are behind on their payments and in line to get shut off. not all of those would get shut off. it's a clear increase and we do not believe it would be appropriate to increase shut off at this time. it would continue both the moratorium shut off for water and power and suspend late payment fees. the more tor moratorium would ll january 2021. it does not eliminate debt but gives breathing room during the emergency to ensure we're doing our part and support our

customers in covid 19 while maintaining our own financial susustainability. as well as the one time discount this is our part to meet this moment of need during this emergency. the recently passed racially justice association found that water is a basic right. this is something we really want to look at over the next few months as part of this moratorium so we ensure when we do restart our collections process we're doing so as part of our high standard that we set out for our racial justice policy. i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> any questions or comments?

hearing none. can you please open this for public comment. >> members of the public wishing to make a public comment please call (888)273-3658 and pound and pound again to be added to the speaker line. do we have any callers? >> there is one call in the queue. >> thank you. >> thank you, members. this is extremely important.

while i've been fortunate over the last thirty years in that i've always had it. i've experienced water and power outages. things go down in a hurry. there are people who are having trouble and we are taking ownership of this by not returning customers to default by pg and e. water and electricity is a health and welfare issue. i hope that we will climb out of this crisis sooner rather than later. people will over time make their effort to pay. in the meantime it is essential that we continue with this policy and not shut people off. i know what it's like to do without when there's a power outage or power failure. i don't want anybody to do

without. it's essential that you have to sign it, thank you. >> thank you. are there any other callers in the queue? >> there are no other calls in queue, madam secretary. >> thank you. >> may i have a motion on this item. >> i move- >> second. kr>> and i have a second. madam secretary, would you take a roll call vote. >> (roll call). five ayes.

>> the motion carries. next item, please. >> next item is plans and specifications in the amount of 30 million four hundred forty two thousand two thun and w hunr the duration of calendar days whiesdayswhile under bid. >> agm for infrastructure. this is to upgrade electrical systems in order to receive additional power which will be needed for the new bio solid facility as well as other improvements at the south east

plant. it will also pro vie provide ups for a second source of power at the plant substation. we're here to request awards to the lowest responses and responsible.

>> (roll call) five ayes. >> motion carries.

>> authorize the general manager to approve future modifications for the contract with no change to the contract duration. this will be introduced by shelby campbell. >> thank you. this project is a c mg c construction project. this is coming in higher at this case for the higher bid packages sm the projecpackages. to pay for additional higher and practices during preconstruction. we're asking to replenish the

construction contingency. >> was this redid or- >> no the way it work ss is we hire the general contractor. the contractor hires trade packages. there's an evaluation of whether to award the trade package. we're almost close to the end of awarding all the trade packages. what happened is we generally have enough money to award the trade packages or allow the contractor to award the trade packages. what we did is we used contingency within the project construction budget to make up the difference on some of these paid packages where the

engineer's estimate was a little lower than what the actual bids came in at. >> i see. okay. okay. any questions? comments? madam secretary, can you open it to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of comment please dial 888-dial one and zero to be added to the speaker line. mr. moderator do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, there are no caller ns in the queue right no.

>> thank you. public comment is closed. >> may i have a motion to move item 14. s>> so moved. >> second. >> madam secretary, could we have a roll call vote. >> (roll call) five ayes. >> motion carries. next item, please. >> approve plans and specifications and award contract number ww693 in the amount not to exceed 9 million six hundred eighty nine thousand

with the duration of four hundred eighty nine calendar days. >> commissioner this item is before you because we received only one bid. we did do extensive out reach. we don't think if we rebid that we would receive additional bidders. we ask that you a wor award this contract to the responsive bidder. >> i was rather curious why we only received one bid. this doesn't seem like unusual work. >> it is not comeucial work.

unusual work. we reached out to the contractors that usually do our work. one was already busy on a project. another said they preferred to bid on the civic notation as opposed to the as needed. they didn't bid on it. there were various reasons that i think we originally had five bidders potentially and some of them just did not respond. >> do we normally do it as needed? >> we normally always have at least one as needed spot for a repair. >> have we had problems with it in the past? >> in the past we have had one

bidder or two or three at the most. >> so this is not unusual behavior? >> no, it is not. >> this particular construction company has done a lot of work for us in the past. they are no strangers for sure. >> any questions or comments? >> i'm glad everybody asked all the questions that they have. that's why this-all of you commissioners are so diligent and spend your time here asking these questions. sometimes there are places that just because the price isn't low enough people keep asking for morbids whether it's in the private or public sector. if there's a single bidder that

as president king said that's done a lot of this work before, there's fiduciary diligence by accepting this type of stuff. i'm going to support this based on the report from system general manager how. that is my comment. thank you. >> thank you. madam secretary, will you please open this up for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make public comment for two minutes. please call in and follow the instructions to be added to the speaker line.

mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, there are no call nz ths in the queue. >> thank you. >> may i have a motion for item number 15. hello, commission. >> i'll move the item. >> i'll second it. >> okay. good. madam second, roll call vote, please.

>> five ayes. >> the motion carries. next item, please. >> next item is item 16 to authorize the general manager to authorize the puc and energy council. this will be presented by julia almond. >> thank you. barbara hale general manager for power. i'm here before you today to seek authorization for install electric home water heaters. this will be done through our contractor as we gear up for our first clean power capital plan. this is one of the first new programs we launch. water heaters using natural gas are among the largest sources of

greenhouse gases and air pollution. that makes this a key area to focus on switching from gas to electric as we strive to meet the city's climate change goals. a specific appliance followed a heat pump water heater. better for grid integration. this technology isn't widely adopted because there is a general lack of training and installation experience among contractors. it's not commonly in stock among distributors. these are circumstances that create obstacles for quick water heater replacements. this program will provide training and incentives for contractors in the bay area to

install heat pump water heaters in the county. a central application hub and incentivization level will make it easier for us to market that program. anthis includes single family ad multi family units whether owner or renter occupied. it would not cover buildings with a central blower or other large water heater. thcreate a regional prodpram tht covers much of the bay area.

this will allow clean power sf to join with minimal resources devoted to program development. this allows us to quickly seize this opportunity to promote a new emission reducing technology. i have a few slides if you could pull those up please. here we show the organizations involved in the program and funding the program. the bay area water management district offered a grant to fund development. the grant was awarded to the bay area regional net work, a public agency that funds programs in the bay area. they select the energy council as the implementor for the

council. a joint power agency governed by local officials and cities within it. they manage a number of energy and waste reduction systems sm thsystems.develop a web portal r incentive applications. if authorized our clean power assess program will join east bay community energy and m c e as participating community choice aggregators. fund incentives for installation that's occur within san francisco and also contribute towards the administrative fees to cover the program activities i just described. clean power sf will also conduct out reach among san francisco based contractors and consumers

to promote the program. next slide, please. to join this initiative the p c will execute an agreement with the energy council. we propose an initial investment of one hundred twenty thousand dollars this fiscal year for participation over a three year program duration. this investment will provide incentives for up to about three hundred forty five installations over those three years. we recognize that this is a modest goal. we think it's appropriate given san francisco unique building stock and the fact that heat pump water heaters aren't widely adopted. our goal is to jump start the market. once interest in the technology

develops and we learn more about how it performs in san francisco. with that i ask for your support and happy to take any questions. thank you. >> when you say work force development, do you mean that later on there will be special training or you have-we're looking at green jbs. jobs. it seems like this is something new and an area to do special training in that. >> the progr program as proposed already including a work force training element. what we're imagine s imagining s the program matures we would develop san francisco specific aspecaspects of work force

development. >> when we talk about training since there aren't very much kron tractors doing this work, who would be eligible to be trained for these jobs since it's brand new to everyone. >> they have to have the appropriate contractor's license. there are about ten contractorss currently ted up to work with them on this plo program. we would be looking to expand that to more san francisco contractors. that includes just one that's a san francisco based company. >> if whoever decides to try this, they would get a discount from san francisco? >> they would get a incentive

payment-the contractor would receive an incentive payment. the contractor would receive the training. the incentive payment would go to the contractor and that would make it more a affordable for the customer. >> they would pass down that incentive. >> that is the inspectation, yes. it's much like the other incentive program we have, for example. go solar sf. the customer signs that incentive payment over it to the contractor that performs the installation. this program is established to tart with the contractor so they are encouraged to market and encourage the type of this particular appliance. the heat pump water heater.

>> sounds great to me. i'm really pleased this is happening. i like the pa partnership model. i like the insenniv incentive pf it. i appreciate your work on this. >> excuse me. i'd just like to recognize the good work of julia almond on our staff. you're thanking me, really it goes to julie. of course her boss. >> please extend our appreciate to them as well and to her. thank you. >> thank you. >> very good. may we have public comment. >> must bees of the public who

wish to make two minutes of public comment. please call the number on your screen and follow the instructions to be added to the speaker line.

>> greenhouse gas emission reduction from building elect ricelectrification.

extending the use of heat pump technology is necessary to help meet our climate goals an to me, it can't come soon enough. this would be a good start, this program. also, i'd like to see the program reup until the time an d funding run out. i would like to see the funding include more types of residences. thank you. >> thank you. mr. moderator, are there other callers? >> madam secretary there are no more calls in the queue. >> thank you. public comment on this item is closed. >> any further discussion on this item.

hearing none, may i have a motion on item 16. mov>> move it. >> second. >> (roll call) five ayes. >> the motion carries. next item, please. >> item 17 approve the terms an condition to execute a redesign with the pin pence