Sector. The next one here is to increase outreach to other city agencies, apartment owners and managers, associations about this onestop shop. And ill stop there for that one. The next performance area is to streamline the process for energy upgrades. Again establish a d. E. R. Ombudsman program, really that goes to the onestop shop recommendation. The next one is that public interfacing agencies promote these programs that exist. You know, so someone approaches, you know, another department, they learn about, you know, what s. F. Environment and sfpuc arounds efficiency, to meet the goals of the Climate Action plan. The next one here is increasing the flexibility of Historic Preservation requirements, so that windows, doors, exteriors, et cetera, can be made for more efficient and less expensive materials. And here we collaborate with the Historic Architectural review board to update these requirements. The next one here is to create shared learning for Energy Efficiency and workforce development. So to learn from other programs, like we did from energy and other c. C. A. S in the bay area. Around the financing and so on. The next one is that s. F. Environment continues to follow the p. U. C. Efforts on the e. R. S, through participation in various regulatory proceedings, to ensure a comprehensive approach to Energy Solutions to reach the citys climate calls. The next performance area is to remove barriers to data collection. Again this is very critical. And the first one here is already done, benchmarking of multifamily buildings. Were really excited top of access to the data in the next few years. The next one is the state of california change the data consents law to allow more access for local governments, to identify potential customers participation in energy use. Again very critical when we address multifamily upgrades. We dont have unitlevel data. Its just like, you know, half information. And finally, we serve individuals surveyed by Energy Efficient programs to learn about their challenges. So thats kind of the long list of our recommendations. Were happy to answer any questions at this point. Chair commissioner stevenson. Yeah. Thank you. That was awesome. First of all, i know that its really hard to get all of that information and insight. So its a heavy list that you guys just did. I think that as just a basic San Francisco civilian, i think that when i hear things like this, from the outside, a lot of times its like, well, of course, the city already knows all of this stuff. This information already exists somewhere. But it doesnt. And it really takes the hard efforts from you guys to do these kinds of things. I really appreciate the work. My big question is whats next. I see this list of implementation strategies that youre recommending. And i see that a lot of them have very interesting implications for things like the department of the environment and other city bodies. Whats the next step to push this forward . And what do you need to output this one of the things we wanted was to present to the board of supervisors and have them, you know, look at the support. And thats to be done. But i think that we achieved an even more critical step a few weeks ago. We presented to the directors of s. F. Environment and the Power Department at sfpuc barbara hail and debby and their staff. We had a really creative conversation about where we can take these recommendations. And i thought that was a really good sort of we set the few next steps for the two teaing agencies to work together. We were asked for priority recommendations. We offered two and made them more current. Because right now this whole building ddecarbon nation work is popping and a lot of funding is coming that way. I feel like we have already started the process of setting those next steps. Would you like to add anything . I was looking at the director. Because i think the department is moving forward, as avni mentioned in the reporting, some of these things have been done. I think the momentum is there. Just a matter of keeping at it. And is there are there plans or is there sort of political will or financing to keep this kind of to track whats happening against these recommendations Going Forward . That is not a question [laughter] yeah. So what we did i mean, that as avni said, we have a really interesting discussion with p. U. C. And whats interesting about the timing of this is at the same time that they were presenting the findings of the report, department of the environment and p. U. C. Are starting to enter into a whole new phase of partnership on Energy Efficiency. Because the landscape of pg e is changing so radically. And because clean power s. F. Is fully enrolled, the p. U. C. Has bandwidth to look at other opportunities for clean power s. F. To access additional revenue and additional ratepayer funds, that right now all go to pg e. As we look to have access to those funds and starting to dictate how the funds would be used, we are hoping that San Francisco p. U. C. Would work order them over to the department of the environment for our Energy Efficiency programs, that we would be doing in Close Partnership with sfpuc. The timing of this was really outstanding, because were starting to think not only about the ask of the California Public utilities commission, but also the work plan for what it would look like. And this idea that keeps coming up in the recommendations over and over in different forms is to simplify and make accessible the opportunities for funding to people who this is not their job. Theyre trying to either operate an Affordable Housing unit or they want to build one. And its such a complicated landscape to try and figure out all of the different opportunities for Energy Efficiency. Whether we call it an ombudsman or onestop shop, the point of this is once the department of the environment has a little more freedom in the use of its funds. Right now through pg e theyre so restricted, we dont have a lot of flexibility. Once we can get the funds through clean power s. F. , that gives us more flexibility to do some of these recommendations that weve been frankly wanting to do. And its so empowering and validating to see outside voices say, yeah, you know, this is really where you need to go next. Is the money that would come to us through clean power s. F. , through the p. U. C. , is that straight over like a grant in our Budget Program . Or is that going to come through the general fund . Thats a great question. I dont know the answer to that. Its money that the San Francisco p. U. C. Would have access to through the rate payers, through the public purchase charge. And how and whether we have to say the p. U. C. Has to decide this as well. Whether and how that money gets to us, is yet to be determined. Commissioner wong. Just a quick question for number 4, multifamily housing. Does that also include s. R. O. Buildings . Because they share a lot of common challenges, including to contact the owner, to do all of the upgrades and also the rebate programs and also the challenges to upgrade the buildings as well. I would like to hear if you have any comments on that. I would say that s. R. O. S are amongst the hardest of properties to retrofit. Those are some specific challenges were talking about there. But these recommendations we did look at s. R. O. S. And they include them absolutely as priority properties. I think it would be great if we could mention s. R. O. As part of this. Sounds good. Absolutely. As part of this recommendation. Commissioner. A lot of great recommendations in here. You mentioned that you were asked to prioritize a couple and you picked two. Im curious to know what those two were. I have them right here. [laughter] the first one is we actually coined a more catchy term, to establish a Citywide Clean Energy building hub. A comprehensive approach to the e. R. Programs for lowincome residents for better service, et cetera. And the second one is to support contractor training for small minority contractors to increase their capacity and access in green sector. Those are the two we felt were the most critical to lowincome communities, because that was our mandate. That will stick in our heads. Thank you. Chair commissioner. I just wanted to also second commissioner wongs comments about making sure s. R. O. S are explicitly included. One thing also briefly looking at the mapping, there is a mention of a. B. 1515. That is great. It better encompasses San Francisco. Having that map included, just so the public is more aware, i think it would be helpful as well. And just recognizing its an ongoing process, continuously improving. And hopefully will better reflect Environmental Justice communities throughout the bay area. The question i wanted to pose back to you is actually around a total different subject labor. What is your assessment on the days of the apprenticeship pipeline . What kind of trades are we looking to onboard into Energy Efficiency work . Well, you know, the electricians, the mechanical trades remain the most relevant for this work. But the laborers are getting into this work. There. So i would say that those Apprenticeship Program that are more open to taking our opportunities in would be a better fit. But, yeah. I think that we need to engage labor more seriously around this issue. Really. To have that conversation. And, of course, are there local c. P. O. S that you would currently recommend as relevant to this apprenticeship pipeline . C. P. O. S is working on the apprenticeship pipeline. Well, you know, a lot of them were reflected in our committee itself. Yeah. Do you want to add anything . Yeah. Yes. As commissioner knows, some of those Training Program representatives were part of the process. Commissioner and his colleagues were not officially on the committee, but attended every meeting. Yeah. I mean, i would say that, you know, obviously city build academy, which is our Apprenticeship Program and the prepreApprenticeship Programs that serve them, whether its mission hiring program, apri, conservation core, youth build. All of those are preparing our youth, lowincome youth to access these careers. So aligning those preapprenticeships into the apprenticeships would be a great way to kind of make that pipeline robust. Thats very helpful. Thank you. Director raphael. Yes. Yes, with the permission of the president , i see that lowell chew is sitting there. And because the Energy Efficiency programs are under him, im wondering if it would be okay for him to comment a little bit on what he heard, as well as perhaps add on next steps in his words. Thank you, director raphael. Good evening, commissioners. Im lowell chew, as debby has mentioned. I heard a lot of great ideas from the report. And some of the things that avni had mentioned that are already implemented, for example, the commercial program. Thats modeled after the multifamily. Its always open enrollment in october. As well as the paper performance piece she mentioned is also incorporated and that it was in that commercial program. More importantly i think that as director raphael mentioned that our partnership is a really unique opportunity to capture what is recommended in the documents and actualizing the operationallize. Some of the equity pieces i know are the same pieces that power s. F. Is aware of and is focusing on. And coinciding that, the onestop shop. Its always a concept thats been brought up. The difficulty in operationallizing it. In some senses what were doing now at s. F. E. Is that single point of contact for Energy Efficiencyrelated services. So we want to make that more defined and more catered towards the equity components in the recommendations. Any other comments . Do we have any Public Comment on item 8 . Okay. Hearing none, next item, anthony. Better here . Okay. The next item is item 9, presentation on sustainability initiatives at the San Francisco international airport. The sponsor is deborah raphael, the speaker is erin cooke, director of sustainability and environmental policy, San Francisco international airport. This item is for discussion. [ please stand by ] ill walk you through the goals weve set for our facility, how they scale and howthy connechowthey connect tod what were doing on the ground to reflect that and implement that, both now and what is actually coming next. Theres 180 concessioneers to what is an Origin Destination airport. And so, for us, those 58 million passengers we serve, we know already have a really strong environmental ethic and certainly a high expectation out of the airport delivering to a onceinlifetime thing. We contribute to Economic Development in the region and make a Service Payment to the general fund for city use of 45 million a year. The 050100 routes are embedded in the framework and for us, allows us the opportunity in 2016 to go above and beyond that what we know is the airport and airports first set of zero goals. So we are striving by 2021 to be the first airport to receive Carbon Neutrality and zero waste, as well as a suite of other initiatives that are focused on health and resilience and stewardship. For us, we were able do this again because of the baseline for the county of San Francisco and we wanted to motivate the 1800 people that work for the commission so those are employed by the city and county of San Francisco to go above and beyond. So we consider this our moon shot and to quote jfk, we chose go to the moon not because it was easy but because it was hard. We knew this would be a rally cry for the people at the airport to come together to figure out how functionally and operationally how we would achieve these objectives. What we have mapped out here and no reason to Pay Attention to the technical details, but basically, a Carbon Neutral strategy we have put into our greenhouse grass emissions to the department of environment on an annual basis. What our Carbon Neutral pathway is. Scope two emissions which are zero out of the Public Utility Commission but scope one is challenging. Theres a Central Plant by natural gas and once we environment ability to electrify this which we think will fall under the new decarbonization code that has been draftedly likely this commission and the department of environment, well reduce 80 emissions on campus from that one change. So big changes afoot for our airport. Were work on a variety of strategies and ill cover that on the next slide but i want to show you that this looks complicated but we have a stepwise approach to Carbon Neutrality. But in terms of scale, when you look at the airports total impact, relative to our full scope of emissions, so if you include scope 3, what comes from our tenants operations, it grosgrows dramatically. So thats a fraction so when you look at cities and counties themselves and the businesses that operate are the largest driver of your emissions. Its a thumbprint when we look at the landing and talkoffs of our aircraft. So that for us is about 1 1. 75 million mec metric tons. So the airport, actually, has been invited and sfo is one of few that have been invited out of a u. N. Body work on Carbon Neutrality goals. When you look act the growth over time, its the amount of passenger miles are expected to actually double by 2014. So the growth curve is not what were looking for in terms of number one, climate am bush ambs but easy to curb those emissions from. When it relates to emissions in our sector we have a few opportunities. Number one, theyre work on technology. So how do they improve aircraft fleet efficiency working with equipment manufacturers . How do they increase the engine efficiency and two, how do you diversify the fuels or electrify aircraft . And three, looking at the base operations so many run, like, at sfo, a Maintenance Operations facility, they have a physical footprint and need to work on diversification of energy supply. Despite that, weve seen that there has been a dramatic decline in the amount of or in the increase of efficiency of aircraft, but were not going to really get to the Carbon Neutral growth target set by aviation unless we move forward with heightened focus on technology, facility operations and sustainable falls. So searcso sfo is focused on thr hand that. Our global a ambition a am am bl as the employees that call that home for 16 hours a day. Were working on zero energy net design. The projects apply to achieve code minimum and code minimum, as you know, in San Francisco is meeting title 24, cal green state requirements, so very high standards. Through this, weve been making investment and a lot of great systems that you see already being implemented at sfo if you go through the harvey milk terminal one, we have great regenerative energy, Renewable Energy on that property, using cool dynamic glaze and glass and happy to get more into the details of the technology. But were making investments in stride. Our demonstration, debbie mentioned were not afraid to test things out. A 24hour operational facility, it was envisioned to be net zero but we needed to tweak it and make a