Published By: Commission
|
MINUTES COMMISSIONERS The Honorable Ryan L. Brooks, President |
DEPARTMENTS AND ENTERPRISES Water Enterprise Gavin Newsom Michael Housh |
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
1. Call to Order: 11:30 P.M.
2. Roll Call: Present – President Ryan L. Brooks, Vice President Ann Moller Caen, Commissioner E. Dennis Normandy, Commissioner Richard Sklar, Commissioner David Hochschild
3. Public Comment
Mr. Francisco da Costa, criticized the late notice for the meeting suggesting it violated the requirements of the Brown Act. Mr. daCosta then urged that the Commissioners embrace the “precautionary principle” when considering the combustion turbines issues and discussed the environmental challenges that the residents of the City’s southeastern neighborhood had experienced.
Another member of the public commented a lack of information as underlying sources for conflict, suggested that their was game playing going on, and criticized the unfairness of the responses made to persons offering public comment suggesting that she had been disparaged for offering her views.
Agenda Item 10 taken out of order.
President Brooks requested General Manager Susan Leal present Agenda Item 10. Ms. Leal presented a general overview of the lengthy process following a state mandate to guarantee reliability of San Francisco’s power supply undertaken by the Mayor, Board of Supervisors President Peskin, Supervisor Maxwell, City Attorney Herrera, and the Public Utilities Commission staff to bring this project to completion. Ms. Leal then updated the Commissioners concerning recent activities related to the combustion turbines project then introduced Deputy General Manager Tony Irons who presented an extensively detailed overview of where the project was located, how the jet engine-like turbines would operate and what that would entail specifically, how the facility would fit into the neighborhood, the expected operation of this facility, and how this project fit into the City’s overall energy planning. Next Assistant General Manager for Power Barbara Hale provided additional information to the Commissioners. President Brooks thanked staff for their continuous very hard work on this project to achieve the maximum benefit with the least environment risk.
In response to a series of questions from Commissioner Sklar concerning noise, the actual pollution levels produced by the existing Mirant diesel turbines, the pollution levels contrast between the existing Mirant CT and the proposed new reliability facility, Mr. Irons provided detailed and specific responses outlining what were the facts in each situation and how staff proposed to address any necessary mitigation.
Mr. Irons then presented a detailed explanation and overview of the role of the California Independent System Operator (Cal-ISO) in California’s deregulated energy market, then role of the state Department of Water Resources subsidies in supporting Run-Must-Run (RMR) status for Mirant, a description of the existing power generation and transmission resources, the requirements to insure system reliability imposed by Cal-ISO. Then Mr. Irons summed up the twists and turns of the lengthy process that resulted from an absolute need to have in-city generation capacity that was acceptable to Cal-ISO in order to facilitate closure of the Mirant Plant.
Next Mr. Irons addressed who would control and under what circumstance that the proposed reliability facility would operate and the current situation regarding how it was proposed to be financed. Mr. Irons stated that it was staff’s view the plant would ideally, except for Cal-ISO mandated testing, only be operated in specific situations where it was ordered to do so to maintain power supply in the event of system breakdown or failure despite it having authorization to operate for a specific number of hours per year. Mr. Irons noted that income would be generated by DWR capacity fees and after they expired a fixed price differential been a locked in low cost and the expected ever rising open energy market would produce substantial revenues even if the plant never actually operated.
In response to questions by President Brooks and Commissioner Sklar, Ms. Leal and Mr. Irons further discussed how the financing could work during the expected 14-year buy-out period.
Ms. Julie Gill of the California Independent System Operator discussed the background of the system improvements that had lead to the closure of the old Bayview Hunters’ Point Power plant and the current status of the states’ RMR for the Potrero Mirant power plant. Ms. Gill noted that there was no change in Cal-ISO’s commitment to the existing approved energy plant and confirmed that RMR status for Mirant could only be removed if the City implemented the energy plan and the specific reliability requirements it had committed to follow. In response to questions from Commissioner Sklar, Vice President Caen, and Commissioner Normandy, Ms. Gill affirmed that Mirant’s RMR (Run Must Run) status would be revoked when the combustion turbine project was in place. Otherwise, it would remain.
Commissioner Normandy then laid out the key points of concerns and issues that he believe addressed the core concerns with this project and if answered could provide a framework for making a thoughtful informed decision. (copy of Commissioner’s Normandy’s framework attached). Commissioner Normandy asked that staff specifically compare and contrast the existing Mirant plant against the proposed CT’s as to air pollution generated, noise pollution levels, power capacity, actual footprint of the plant facilities, who controls operation, and what was the true financial cost to the City. Next Commissioner Hochschild observed that this was the biggest most difficult decision that had faced the Commission in recent years and called attention to the expanded power resources provided by the recently approved Transbay transmission cable as well as ongoing effort at demand reduction and to promote energy conservation. Commissioner Hochschild expressed his exasperation that the Commissioners faced making a retrograde choice to put in place another fossil fueled power plant when the city and the agency’s strong commitment was to growing and developing local generation of renewable energy resources.
Commissioner Sklar next outlined various scenarios where Cal-ISO could be persuaded to allow Mirant to be closed without or with use of fewer combustion turbines and urged staff to strive for alternatives. Commissioner Normandy noted that consideration of possible alternatives was always useful and also urged that staff continue to examine every possible realistic alternatives. However, Commissioner Normandy observed the pressing question before Commission now was what would affect the closure of Mirant most immediately and that seemed to be going forward with the CT project.
Mr. Philip DeAndrade, Chairman of the Potrero Hill Powers Plant Task Force, next described the lengthy and very difficult six year long community and public input process that led the Task Force to strongly support going forward with the combustion turbines project. This he observed was the only way to insure closure of the existing toxics spewing Mirant plant. Mr. DeAndrade pointed out that in deference to their neighbors in Bayview Hunters’ Point, Potrero Hill residents and the Power Plant Task Force had supported closure of the even more severely polluting Pacific Gas and Electric Company (P.G. & E.) Power Plant in that community first and now that that had been accomplished it was only fair and proper to address his neighborhood’s longstanding desire to shut down their polluting plant. Mr. DeAndrade applauded everyone’s sincere efforts to find renewable alternatives to this choice that would be in an ideal world preferable, but said that given the facts of this situation going forward with the reliability project as planned was the only realistic way to insure Mirant’s closure.
10. Discussion and possible action related to SFPUC Resolution No 07-0137, and discussion of the proposed San Francisco Electric Reliability Project (the Combustion Turbines (CTs)), discussion of the environmental reviews of this project.
4. Public comments on matters to be discussed in Closed Session.
Mr. Joshua Arce, Brightline Defense Project, expressed skepticism that further discussions would lead to any real change, that the result would be not one but two polluting plants operation, and that Mirant intended to keep on running until it no longer made economic sense to do so.
Ms. Marie Harrison, Green Action, emphasized that the proposed new facility was a danger to the community that the City could avoid, and that the City should focus its funds in partnership with the community to develop and promoting clean green alternatives.
Mr. Francisco da Costa, Director Empirical Justice Advocacy, suggested that the meeting had been improperly noticed; that many of the staff’s statement about this project were untrue; that the City had rigged the input process by the exclusion of true community representation for the Power Plant Task Force; and that no one in the community supported installation of the combustion turbines.
Dr. Tompkins likened the antiquated technology of the CT’s to an old hot rod and called attention to the neighborhood’ history of higher pollution than other parts of the City. and the resulting history of severe health impacts including high rates of asthma among residents.
Mr. Martin Homec, CARE, noted the role of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in this matter and urged consideration of alternatives.
Mr. Jaron Browne noted that the community was not aware of or fully informed about this project and noted that there was no guarantee that going forward with the CT’s would close Mirant.
Dr. Ahimsa Sumchai Porter, a mayoral candidate and Southeast Community resident, commented that in her view there was not sufficient information available to go forward with this project and that there was no guarantee that Mirant would be closed. She noted that this issue should properly be examined in the context of the City’s efforts to reduce climate change caused by global warming.
Ms. Silvia Johnson suggested that the Public Utilities Commission did not care about the community and had ignored their complaints about this project, which she said was opposed by the entire community.
Mr. Donnie Chilton Sr., a life long resident of Bayview Hunters’ Point, urged the Commissioners not to follow the closure of the Bayview Power plant by opening a new plant in Potrero and said this mistake would be strongly opposed by the community.
Mr. James A. Bryant criticized support of the project as unrepresentative and called attention to what he found to be anti-labor attitude held by JPower. He said going forward was a mistake and the community would not allow it to happen.
Ms. Espanola Jackson, Bayview Hunter’s Point, reiterated her longstanding opposition to the CT Project noting that she was there because of concern for the health of her children and grandchildren. Ms. Jackson criticized Supervisor Maxwell’s role in supporting this project and called attention to the many other serious environmental problems experienced by Bayview Hunters’ Point residents.
Mr. Abram Williams said he lived near the proposed site of the power plant and was very concerned about possible health impacts questioning why old technology that potentially exposed people to health risks was being used instead of green alternatives. He said putting people first was a moral imperative and that San Francisco should be in the forefront of sustainable energy development.
Mr. Lionel McGilberry, noted that he had raised six children in the neighborhood, and many family members has asthma and that he joined with others in strong opposition to installation of what he said were un-needed polluters that would negatively impact children in the community.
An anonymous member of public noted his own five children living in the community and saw no need for this new power plant adding to the already very poor air quality in Bayview Hunters’ Point.
Mr. Eddie Kittrell, an elected representative of the residents of the Potrero Hill Annex Housing, criticized what he characterized as deliberate exclusion of himself and other representatives of the community from the ongoing work of the Potrero Hill Power Plant Task Force during the past six years, and urged that this project not go forward until everyone in the community had a voice in the decision.
Mr. Rob Black, San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, expressed the Chamber’s concern about installation of the peakers but agreed closure of Mirant was important and urged further digging into the facts before a decision was made.
President Brooks thanked Mr. Black for the Chamber’s input and asked what the Chamber of Commerce had done to promote alternative energy sources, conservation, and demand reduction among its member businesses. Vice President Caen noted that that the Chamber had helped previously.
Mr. Joseph Bryant reported that his organization had collected 950 signatures opposed to the CT’s and asked the Commissioners to consider why it always seemed that polluting facility got located in the southeastern neighborhoods.
Dr. Eddie C. Welborn, Pastor, Ministry Conference, called attention to the many existing concerns in the community about the clean up of the old Naval Shipyard, the impact of the Southeast Treatment facility and said enough is enough and urged that the Commissioners find a way to work with the community to get rid of pollution in the neighborhood.
Mr. Lynne Brown noted that the peaker might be more intrusive and produce more pollution than the existing Mirant Plant and urged the Commissioners not to approve it.
Mrs. Brenda Kittrell cited her chronic bronchitis and said she spoke for the children of the community and the workers at the Muni bus yard near 25th Street and Illinois that might be exposed to further health risks if the CT’s were built, instead she urged support for tree planting and opposition to any more polluting faculties in her community.
Ms. Cherie Wells called attention to the needs of her seven children and grandchildren living in the neighborhood and asked as someone who loved their community why it seemed that negative faculties where always placed there.
Ms. Dorothy Minkins noted that both her daughter and herself suffered from breathing difficulties that she feared this plant would make worse and urged opposition to going forward with it.
Mr. Jason Young noted that the people living in the City’s Southeastern neighborhoods already faced many challenges and opposed the CT Project as yet another trouble for the community.
Ms. Renita Abrams noted her own breathing problems and noted the existence of the sewer plant as well as other environmental problems in the community.
Ms. Andrea Smith asked that the Commissioners delay making any decision until they had personally come out to additional meetings in the community to gather more input concerning this project.
Mr. Guillermo Rodriguez, A Randolph Institute, urged the Commissioner to look beyond their staff’s presentation and suggested that the likely result of going forward would be two polluting plants instead of one. He urged the Commissioners to direct their staff to consider the various green alternatives proposed by his organization.
President Brooks commented he found Mr. Guillermo’s comments disingenuous noting that this situation was the result of P.G. & E. pulling out of the efforts to find a solution at the 11th hour and the City to having to scramble quickly to find another solution that would close the Mirant Plant. Commissioner Sklar commented that the Commission had not properly considered options such as using only two combustion turbines or convincing Cal-ISO that the creation of the Transbay Cable and ongoing energy conservation and demand reductions could provide the guarantee of reliability that they were seeking.
Mr. Eric Brooks, Our City & San Francisco Green Party, reported that the Green Party was opposed to installation of the peakers and suggested that green alternative could be put in place to close Mirant immediately and that greater efforts needed to be made to convince the Energy Industry dominated Cal-ISO that the recently approved Transbay Cable and, implementation of expanded alternative energy production proposed under Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) as well as ongoing energy conservation could provide a better way to insure energy reliability instead of relying on an energy source of the past.
Mr. Larry Lattimore, POWER, asked how did we get here and why were we obligated to use outdated polluting technology when there were ample solar power resources that could be used instead. Mr. Lattimore did not understand why funds allocated to build the CT’s not be used instead to create renewable energy resources that would generate sufficient power to guarantee reliability as well as sell to local users, especially given the existing health concerns in the community.
Mr. Joe Boss, Potrero Hill Power Plant Task Force and a nearby resident of the Dogpatch community the location of the existing and proposed facility, urged the Commissioners support the six year long effort by the Potrero Hill community to find and build an alternative to the severely polluting Mirant Plant. He noted that the proposed CT’s Project was, in the community’s view, the only reliable guarantee that Mirant would be closed. Mr. Boss noted putting in the CT’s was not the shot in the dark that its critics described it as, but was instead the result of an extensive years long community process.
There followed a discussion among the Commissioners concerning various points raised during the discussion of the proposed project with questions concerning possible alternative solutions being suggested by Commissioner Sklar. Vice President Caen asked about using solar resources to meet the projected energy needs. Commissioners Sklar and Hochschild urged their colleagues to undertake a very careful consideration of all of the facts heard as well as consider what additional efforts were possible to find an alternative solution. Further discussion of these issues was then deferred to hearing information to be presented in closed session.
CLOSED SESSION
NOTE the Commission will go into Closed Session to discuss items on its agenda shortly after the beginning of the meeting and will remain in closed session one hour.
Additional Public Comment on closed session
Mr. Eric Brooks, Our City & San Francisco Green Party, called attention to the complex process that led to the JPower contract being discussed at this meeting suggesting that in his view it was a “no bid” contract and urged that Commissioners to consider this history in their discussions.
Mr. Joshua Arce, Brightline Defense Project, called attention to the new information concerning the levels of pollution produced by the peakers that had been revealed at the meeting saying his organization would be looking into this question further.
Mr. James A. Bryant, A. Philip Randolph Institute, defended Mr. Rodriquez’ work for his organization and commended the Commissioners for addressing this issue in a serious and thorough manner.
5. Motion on whether to assert the attorney-client privilege regarding the matters listed below as Conference with Legal Counsel. Moved by Commissioner Hochschild, seconded by Vice President Caen to assert the attorney-client privilege; passed (5-0) unanimously.
The Public Utilities Commission met in Closed Session at 2:30 P.M.
Present were President Ryan L. Brooks, Vice President Ann Moller Caen, Commissioner Dennis Normandy, Commissioner Richard Sklar, Commissioner David Hochschild, General Manager Susan Leal, Deputy General Manager Tony Irons. Deputy City Attorney Theresa Mueller, Assistant General Manager for Power Barbara Hale, SFPUC Counsel Noreen Ambrose, and Commission Secretary Michael Housh.
6. Conference with Real Property Negotiator – Pursuant to Sunshine Ordinance Section 67.8 (a)(2), Govt. Code section 54956.8: Property: located at 25th Street and Maryland in San Francisco, California. (Hale) Negotiator for the SFPUC: Barbara Hale Negotiator: JPower.
7. Conference with Legal Counsel – Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9 (b) and (c) and San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10 (d) (2) Anticipated Litigation: As defendant. (Ambrose)
Following the Closed Session, the Commission reconvened in Open Session at 3:52 P.M.
18. Announcement following Closed Session.
President Brooks announced that no action had been taken during the Closed Session.
19. Motion regarding whether to disclose the discussions during Closed Session.
Moved by Commissioner Hochschild, seconded by Commissioner Sklar not to disclose the discussions during Closed Session; passed (5-0) unanimously.
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:53 P.M.
Michael Housh
Secretary
