that is the program when it was initially proposed by pg&e would have pg&e offering to san franciscans an opportunity for 100% renewable product that is greening up their portfolio to using renewable energy credits, so they have placed a proposal before the california puc for -- their agreement. parties are engaged in asking questions, testimony has been filed. the cupuc had scheduled hearings in december for the proposal, but those hearings on hold in order to allow parties to talk further and potentially arrive at a settlement. there really isn't active settlement discussion under way right now. we expect that may happen in january, and if you play out that process we think that maybe july or august of 2013 we will know what shape the program that pg&e has proposed has been authorized by the cupuc. pg&e would then as i understand it from their filings need to go through a solicitation process to hire a third party contractor to perform the program implementation and we're thinking it would probably be a tariffed and ready program by maybe around february of 2014. that's all very tent

by pg&e at roughly $4.5 million. those service connections are subject to a number of rebate programs based on consumption. the san francisco public utilities commission, the cost of making that connection would be greater, but the proposal from the san francisco public utilities commission is that they would cover any additional costs above and beyond those that would be required for the pg&e service connection. and, in fact, that they would -- because they are not required to pay a state tax on the service connections, they would decrease the cost of our service connection by the cost of that tax, which is rough life $650,000. and their service connection would be subject to the same refunds as the pg&e service connection. so that we're at a very equitable basis, but realizing about a $650,000 initial savings on cost of service. it's worth noting also that the puc has additional energy-efficiency rebates that they have indicated that the transit center might be eligible for above and beyond those offered by pg&e. a

it's sort of an over hang cost pg&e is allowed to charge to make sure the customers that stay for pg&e pay for cost it incurred on behalf of customers that left. >> commissioner olague. >> yeah, i guess -- it reminded me of pass throughs and tenants get charged sometimes for the increases and fees that the landlords have and i wonder how that worked ultimately but you kind of answered. >> okay. >> -- what i was thinking, but i guess i am concerned a little bit -- of course we want to definitely inform customers about these increases and rates that would result as part of this clean power shift, but i think -- i guess at some point i would be interested in understanding how that is going to be marketed or what language or what script would be used, because ultimately the goal isn't so much related to, you know, -- well, i have to be careful how i say this i guess, but i guess the goal the city is reach 100% renewable electric supply within 10 years so we have these -- i think very lofty values in a good place so i want to make sure when we're approaching and informing customers about t

we are 41% renewable if you include hydro electric power and hetch hetchy and pg&e hydro generation, but the goal as set out by mayor newsom is to become 100% renewable and we have a task force comprised of leaders and community and stakeholders, environmental ngo's and the local utilities and relevant city departments. the task force met for 18 months monthly to discuss issues with renewable energy development for the city and the was to do this goal within 10 years so we looked at barriers and technical opportunities, financial aspects and of course public education and awareness, and ultimately outlined recommendations around three areas, energy efficiency and utility generation and the course identified five prong strategy to help achieve this goal and the first is shrink the pay. of course by reducing the amount of lktd the city demands it's easier to get to the 100% so there are a number of recommendations want a few of them are highlighted here and strengthening the retrofit rules, promoting energy audits, and through the real estate which we did a couple we go with the lead r

. >>> a south bay man is taking on pg&e, hoping to save his backyard. the battle is over a gas pipeline that runs through his property and 16 others in mountain view. and what happens with his fight could term what happens to other homeowners as pg&e works to improve safety following the deadly san bruno explosion. jean elle is live in mountain view to explain. >> reporter: part of pg&e's pipeline safety plan involves clearing most of the land above the pipeline. trouble is, that land hasn't been clear in years. and here in mountain view, pg&e wants homeowners to clear beloved back yards. >> the pipe is right in the middle. right about here. >> reporter: dennis goldwater learned last summer pg&e's pipeline runs under his yard. it's part of the same pipeline that exploded in san bruno. now, he's fighting pg&e over his back yard. >> what i've got is a yard and a imagination. they're taking that away from me. >> reporter: pg&e is telling goldwater and 16 of his neighbors the land above the pipe must be cleared for safety. >> we're clearing the area where t

when that happens, what pg & e came in the room with may change. and once we know what it is, we are in a better position to know how to talk about it. >> thank you. >> todd. >> todd is ready with his green approach with his bow ties. >> happy holidays first offal. todd rydstrom, general manager and cfo. i prepared the budget package and the most important part is about three pages worth. this is the time of the year when we come to you looking for insig insight. what you want to hear in budget meetings and the mayor has met with all department heads as well as cfos. and has given budget instructions to departments. i am pleased to announce that our department has a balanced budget. and you adopted and put forward that two-year budget. and we will go through the budget and visit key assumptions, and come back and share 10 year of projected impacts and 10 years of capital needs. still some big things to talk about. but it won't be the usual line item by line item analysis you have done in the past. what it does is afford us the opportunity to take a

related to pg&e. i am wondering how we're anticipating a response to such an effort to mislead and make beguile people in san francisco? >> we do expect we will have lots of questions from customers, and we're really hoping to encourage folks to the extent they have questions, they hear things that are concerning to talk to us. we really want an opportunity for folks to make an informed decision, and we will stay very true to the need to educate and not mislead. we hope that other participants in the dialogue will as well, but it will be a challenge for us to make sure folks are getting accurate information and really being educated about this choice. >> very good. thank you. let's go on to public comment. this is on these three items. i don't have any cards before me. we will do three minutes per person. >> good afternoon commissioners. eric brooks representing san francisco green party and the local grass-roots organization "our city". hopefully you have read the email, all of you that advocates sen

the system of reliability was raised during the study interview with pg&e in november 2011 and pg&e followed up with the council getting support to ada third connection to the embarcadero station with this going to the portero substation and improve system reliability particularly into the downtown area in a major earthquake and allow pg&e more flexibility with work and unexpected equipment outages. they gave three routes and options to provide feedback and you can see from the box, the green, red and blue routes so pg&e is continuing to work with the city and the project design and the approval process and hopes to begin work in 2014 or 2015. so looking ahead we will be completing the life line interdependences study in 2013. we are also in the process of developing a work program then. in the last meeting in september we asked participants to identify issues to all operators and for the city to develop the restoration plan and performance expectations, restoration priority and capability. we will select a few of these to work together on over the next year. we plan to have quarterly meetin

issue -- it's really an issue of auditing and that is who will determine the pass through cost that pg&e shifts to its shareholders versus to the rate payers? is that a function of the state agency or do we have independent jurisdiction over that process? >> we don't have independent jurisdiction. it's within the purview of the california public utilities commission. our role really is only as an active party there to try and influence their decision. >> so we wouldn't procure the services and audit and whether pg&e is following through on the commitment not to shift the rate for the rate payers and opting into our system? >> i don't know that we would be barred from asking for audits, but it would be a discretion -- it would be at the discretion of the cupuc. they can audit but we don't have independent audit rights over -- >> [inaudible] >> we do for the franchise agreement. >> right. but we could recommend for the puc to take some action. >> i see the city attorney has advice for us. >> the proposed position is audits every two years with the code of conduct rules and rules of compl

first pg&e records are not evidence of a legality -- or of a legal unit.nív÷ has stated they bought the property in 1997. at the time they bought it, it was a four unit building. however i would note according to records they provided the4( -< fourth electric meter wasn't added untilu0 for each electric unit, would they argue they have four units on the property? i think that's an open question. again it's not evidenc%i í=Ñ of a legal unit. we go by the records of the building inspection. as stated inaj hearing we believe there was an error in the records. there was a cfc4#b!Ñbç issued to reduce the number of units from three to two. the reduction of number of units was required in order to subdivide the lot and to create new housing. so there are new buildings that were built, two unit buildings that were built on subdivided lots. reduction in the units from three to two was a requirement and stipulation of that. it n lot number. that lot number was super seeded seeded subdivision of the lot. that's where that issue came up. it is clear from the departmen

so, the first item, pg&e electric rate change, you may have seen in the newspaper that pg&e's electric rates as well as their gas rates changed with the first of the year. those knewly approved rates went into effect and they do have -- because we're proposing the clean power effect program, they do have a bearing on that program. we can expect that prospective customers would see a smaller electric bill premium than we had projected because of the increased pg&e electric generation rates that went into effect on january 1st. pg&e's generation rate was 7.1 cents a kilowatt hour. that increased to 7.9 cents a kilowatt hour on january 1. pg&e explained that rate increase as being driven by high cost for acquiring clean renewable energy to meet their state mandates and as well as spending that had been previously approved by the cpuc for operating maintaining and upgrading their electric generation and distribution systems. so, those were the drivers behind the rate increase that san franciscans are feeling on the electric side. pg&e also stated that they foresee customers, electric custo

>> i'll go ahead and talk about pg&e. i would say first off we've designed our own standards for what should happen in an earthquake or any other major emergency. our electric system is designed to worry about trees and wind and rain, which is what we see the most of, and tends to be the most damaging, but we have our own standards and our own expectations in terms of what our system should be able to withstand. add david pointed out, the risk is that an event will occur that is greater than what you have prepared for. that's always a possibility. in terms of working with others i think the important part is to make sure you understand what everyone is relying on you for. so it really comes back it an issue of priorities. what's going to come back first, what's going to come back second. for pg&e we always worry about bringing electrical generation back, those are done in conjunction with our gas and electric together. most of the power plants in california are fed natural gas, you need to get the gas back up before you g

executive powers, and get around pg&e that way. in germany it's created 400,000 new jobs. it's created $4 billion in cash flow through the economy and making the german economy the strongest in europe and it's the -- it basically is a policy that pays the homeowners so it makes investing in solar attractive to homeowners. right now it's not attractive to put a hundred solar panels on your roof, but under this policy germany has made tremendous advances. there is one country in the world that is 100% solar power as of last month. cca cannot possibly do what they need done. the word -- you can boil this whole argument down to one question, one word and that is "inevitability". we are running out of the oil. we are drowning in our own waste. we need to stop burning oil and the way you could do it is putting a couple hundred solar panels on each house in san francisco. this was indirectly mentioned in the guardian editorial but they don't say it and it's because they don't understand it. it's important to understand what being done in