it encourages the investor owned utilities like p.g. & e to prudently manage their supply portfolios to minimize the cost. it creates a more stable and predictable charge for the customer. that predictability helps all customers. it allows programs like ours to continue to invest long-term and renewable resources and in developing the innovative, local programs that clean power s.f. is all about. we -- the alternate proposed decision, unfortunately, does the opposite. it creates risks risks for c.c.a. programs that compromise clean power s.f.'s sustainability and our greenhouse gas reduction goals. it. it undermines the local progress all c.c.a. programs are making these advances and providing cleaner air -- cleaner -- the alternate proposal could significantly impact the c.c.a. 's ability to deliver clean energy products at a lower or equal cost to taking generational service. we worked with c.c.a. to provide comment on the judge proposed decision on august 21st. we are currently working with the c.c.a. trade association on comments and response to the alternate decision. those comme