That could push back whats the long state for cleanpowersf. I know there are members of the public who have concerns about that, but before we dive in, i just want to acknowledge that we have made tremendous progress on cleanpowersf this year. Weve actually had an rfp that successfully drew in many respondents. We didnt have that many respondents the last time we issued and rfp and indicated some really good choices to move forward on. I want to move forward and i believe this is shared by all the commissioners here. We all want to move forward as quickly as possible. So today, we really want to see how given the circumstances that we are operating under how we can do that and how we can stay as close to our timeline as possible. The thing that is looming more quickly before us is the approval of the contracts now that weve had a successful response to the request for proposals, and i would like to make sure that we can actually sign those and do whatever we need to do in terms of approval for the board of supervisors as quickly before we get to the new year. Its always been in place that the approval of the contracts was going to be that marker to show that we were actually very very serious about moving forward with our clean power program. So, i like forward to hearing the presentation today and i want to thank the commissioners for being here and i will pass it over as well, thank you. Good afternoon and thank you chair avalos for the opportunity to partner this Commission Meeting. I would like to thank puc who have worked to launch the cca program. We have been getting updates and progress about every Commission Meeting. Finally i want to thank your staff at lafco and the advocates in the room. Their contributions have helped San Francisco puc and the city to get to the pivotal point. We are looking forward to further collaboration especially as we look to maximize early sign ups for the clean power San Francisco. At our puc Commission Meeting a few days ago we received a preview of the presentation that staff will present today. And it really is great. To briefly summarize we are excited about the progress and i hope all of you will be as well. We are developing a Business Plan and in depth risk analysis that will bereaved by an independent third party. We have received more bids than we possibly thought. Which will only help us go forward in a very comparative and affordable program. Finally the pucs Communication Team which is led by a very talented resourceful tyrone june to help to get our City Residents and businesses excited about cleanpowersf. The same team has launched the most innovative and creative campaigns that have garnered local, state and national recognition. Once again on behalf of the entire San Francisco puc commission i look forward to launch cleanpowersf and Bring Clean Energy to San Francisco as quickly as possible. Very good, thank you, commissioner cane any other comments . Thank you. Now is time for Public Comment. Public speaker clean power, i think with all the energy is the safety for the user. Maybe you the clean power with computer and user. Thank you. Any other member of the public who would like to comment . Seeing none, well close Public Comment on item no. 3. Madam clerk, clerk, please call the next item. City clerk item 4. Cleanpowersf activities report. Status update on cleanpowersf program. Power purchasing activities and timeline for program launch. B. Status update on proceedings at the Public Utilities commission. C. Status update on state legislation. D. Cleanpowersf enrollment and outreach plans. Good afternoon. Im general manager harlem. Weve made tremendous progress in the last several months an we are going to share the progress we have made around our outreach and engagement and the rfo. Its really amazing to anticipate that we would receive ten offerings. Now we have 52. That is really outstanding. I think that is really going to help offer us a very competitive product. I will say it will help to encourage others to sign up. I have signed up and i know some of the commissioners have signed up and in the process of signing up. I think we are going to be asking for advocates and people to come up to testify to make sure they sign up or commit to help us sign others as well. I think we have a great plan and im excited to implement it. So with that, i would like to turn it over to barbara hale to give the formal presentation. Thank you, mr. Kelly. Thank you, barbara hale. I have a brief presentation to go through and through the enrollment and outreach program. As mr. Kelly mentioned we have been making some progress. Mostly on our supply efforts. The request for offer results are under evaluation. Well go over that and talk about our implementation scheduling and key milestones before we get into the outreach and enrollment. We cant say too often. We are signing folks on our website cleanpowersf. Org. We have 200 people enrolled and we are happy to see the uptake in the sign ups. As a reminder, the program objectives, we are leading with affordable and Reliable Service. Afford abltd affordability is the key for us. We are bringing in businesses and we are going to take the contribution to pay for that new supply and reinvest in new infrastructure creating local jobs in San Francisco through Energy Efficiency and renewables programming. A quick update on the regulatory front first. Weve seen some changes in pg e rates. Its one of the many times that pg e changed its rates. This year it was a little more interesting in that we saw a decrease in the degeneration of component and decrease in the exit charge, the pcia and different cost and applies to Community Choice aggregation for customers. On net for us, that means the ceiling rate that we have been charging our program at. That ceiling rate has come down by 10 . Squeezing the margins a little bit but its important for us as we develop the program to be vigilant on what the competitive rate is. We are just reporting out to you on what we see and the changes. Those changes will go into effect under the c puc schedule in january. Pg e is also moving forward with their green tariff option with the california puc staff have made a recommendation to the commission to approve pg es request with some modifications. We are happy to see some of the modifications they are very responsive at the position of the c puc to make sure consumers can compare the program, c puc, options on an even footing so consumers will see on their bills when they are participate negative our program that pcia charge, for example, if they choose to participate in pg es green Tariffs Program they will also see the pcia charge on that bill. It will be easier, more of an apples to apples comparison if you will. We were happy to see that the c puc staff, california puc staff is proposeing the modifications for the transparency of the program. They are expected to have that before the commission for a vote late october early november. On sb 350, one of the biggest actions our Legislature Took this year. It was senate bill 350. Portfolio standard obligations for the folks who serve the companies and Public Utilities will now be required to have 50 of their retail sales be from california compliant renewable source of power be served from california compliant sources by 2030. That is a new target. 50 new year, 2030. Sort of amping up the emphasis on renewables. Getting california cleaner and cleaner and the next steps to address Climate Change. We were happy in our efforts combined with other community chose aggregation program. Moving along. With the supply efforts. As a hypodermic needler we have the supply that we are procuring for. Two products for our customers. Our default proposal for basic pg es basic service. It will be 33 50 bundled renewable content. Pg es last state certified report said 27 of their power comes from california qualified renewable resources. We were also out in the market procuring for our second product, our 100 renewable product. Our premium product and thats the product that will compete against pg es green tariff options. Again, it will be the same service, but cleaner energy. The products that we went out into the market to request provide for three different types of supply for us. The first which we are referring to is bid option 1, refirmed and shaped energy, shaped renewables and convention energy. We ask to bid in a price and supply profile over the year that matches what we project to be our customer demand forecast over the year. We also ask for just plain Renewable Energy bids, bid option two that provides firmed and shaped energy and Renewable Energy as well so those developing Renewable Energy can bid that. Then we have the third bid option Resource Adequacy capacity that all electricity are required to provide for to ensure Reliable Service on the grid. So lets dig a little bit deeper. We received six bids under option one. We received more bids than we anticipated. We received six bids and short listing three firms. We that had oral interviews monday and the Evaluation Team is continuing to work through those particular bids. Those bids were to provide approximately 300 gig watt hours under the early portion of the program and ramp up to 40 gig watt hours for the 40year term of the contract. To put that in context it would be 6,000 gig watt hours give or take. Onto option 2, the Renewable Energy. Thats where we god got 52 bids. Its a very good problem to have. Lots of folks interested in selling to us and participating as a provider to cleanpowersf program. Thats a mix of both operating renewable projects and projects that are underdevelopment. They are all located in california and some are located in the bay area and by bay area i mean the nine bay area counties. These are counties that touch the bay. So we are narrowing this pool of this pool of 52, a bit unwieldy to a more manageable list for negotiation. Thats the process we are under going now. For the Resource Adequacy product, we have received six bids. All of these bids im happy to report are quite cost competitive. We are very pleased to see what the cost are shaping up to be as far as the supply. Supply is the largest portion. Its a huge cost driver for the program. When we talk about being able to provide an affordable probable for city san franciscans, a key is energy supply. We think thats achievable getting an Affordable Energy supply together. How are we figuring out which of these large volume of bids we are going to talk with further. We are going to screen them through this. We are in an active process through this reevaluation criteria. What are the qualifications and experience, the total cost and bid value to us. Are the projects that are being proposed viable because we dont want to hitch our cart to a dying pony. We have resource location and sort of compatibility with our overall portfolio that we are building as a final criteria. This notion negotiation we are going through will take some time, we are in standard contract terms that we public with the bid we are working through those with the City Attorneys now. We are going through Due Diligence process that is also taking some time. That we have such a much higher volume than we had anticipated is really part of the challenge which as i say is a good challenge. Part of the challenge we are facing right now. Some of the bids that are quite attractive are coming in at annual payments greater than 5 million which is the authority caps that we have under the procurement ordinance and some over 10 million Charter Authority that we have. So we now anticipate that we will be coming back to the board of supervisors for approval of some of these contracts, not all of them the procurement ordinance gave us some Additional Authority delegated to the general manager and commissioner some authority where we maybe able to sign some contracts and now the bids that are in well have to come to the board for additional action. Thats going to take some additional time. Which brings us to the schedule. We had hoped to be at our commission on october 13th with the risk analysis and the supply contracts. We now think as we go through the volume of bids as we look at a more rigorous Risk Assessment process. I know we talked about it originally and scheduled it as a Risk Assessment, now its grown into a more full Business Plan as to what presented to our commission on the publically owned utility function. So we are looking at some delays in the schedule associated with review at the board and with ensuring we provide our commission with adequate assessment of the risk before asking for them to authorize the general manager to sign any contracts. We are still looking at swift but smart movements forward in launching this program. But we are unfortunately looking at about a 6week delay in when we expect the launch date to occur. Having said that, we are looking at ways to creatively dual track some of the activities. For example we had previously committed to providing the Risk Assessment and contract authorization action at the board at our commission simultaneously, now we are talking with the general manager whether we should bring the short list of the supply contractors to the commission and seek conditional authorization so that with the conditions being things like making sure we complete the Business PlanRisk Assessment work that the commission is looking for. With that conditional authorization then those contracts could move forward in the negotiation process and to get to the board quicker than if we waited to perform these tasks sequentially. Those are the things that we may do to keep things moving swiftly and not get too far from launch from spring of 2016. We are talking that over with our general manager and we are looking to the Business Plan of the commission in the November December timeframe. Make sure the commission is comfortable in october with the Business Plan by perhaps reviewing the outline of it before we present the full Business Plan and the November December timeframe. So thats the meat in my presentation. I will turn it to outreach and enrollment when you are ready for me to step aside. Supervisor john avalos thank you, while you are here i would like to ask you a couple questions. My colleagues will have the same ones. Most of all im interested in seeing exactly what kind of delay we will have and see if we can still move forward aggressively on things now and have some contracts and certainty around that as soon as possible. Supervisor david campos thank you. Im still trying to understand what happened. You said how many weeks is the delay . At this point we are guesstimating about 6 or so weeks. When we initially put the schedule together we put that schedule together assuming there would be no need for board of supervisors action. That has changed. When we initially put the schedule together we were envisioning a Risk Assessment. We are now envisioning a more rigorous Business Plan and Third Party Review of that Business Plan. So that will add some time as well. So those are the factors, the primary factors that have changed. Of course the volume of the bid in and of itself. This has been a very aggressive bid process we opened solicitation august 7th. We published our short list. Thats a very aggressive schedule originally. Weve managed to stay on track so far with that, but just to volume of bids that we are evaluating is a factor in the delay as well. When you say 6 weeks or so, does that mean it could be longer than 6 weeks . Yes, and it also means it could be shorter than 6 weeks. Do you have the sense of the longest period . Not as im here today but a it could be sent to the general manager. One of the challenges is that some of the proposals companies we dont know exactly if they meet all the city requirements. So thats Something Else we need to look at about compliance. So we just need to make sure, that is something that we dont really know. I know there is some issue about the tax issue. Yes, limited Liability Corporations and how we dont do business with them anymore. Was that addressed in the rfp that went out . Compliance with city rules was addressed yes. Okay, so first of all i just want to understand what the parameters are. Could it be 12 weeks . Sure it could be, i think its unlikely, considerably unlikely for it to be 12 weeks. I am pretty worried and what i dont understand is from the very beginning the Lafco Commission certainly has been very cleared that we are prepared to expedite whatever approval is needed at the board of supervisors. I dont understand why we did not anticipate the fact that we are seeing there is additional approvals needed. Why wasnt that considered before . I think when we set up the procurement ordinance we went up for as much delegation as