San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Citizens' Advisory Committee
Power Subcommittee

MINUTES

Thursday, July 6, 2006
5:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.
1155 Market Street, 4th Floor Conference Room
San Francisco, CA

Members present:  David Hochschild, Aaron Israel, Kimia Mizany, David Pascal

Members not present: Ken Cleaveland, Ken Monteiro, Nick Carlin

Staff:    Jim Marks, Communications

Public: Staff representing Babcock & Brown’s Trans Bay DC Transmission Line Project

1. Committee came to order at 5:30 pm
   
2. Four members present; there was a quorum
   
3. Minutes of 6/6/2006 meeting adopted without revision
   
4. Public Comment:  There was no public comment.  Baykeeper and SF Community Power submitted copies of their draft EIR comments on Babcock & Brown’s proposed project; SF Community Power also submitted a fact sheet the organization had prepared on this project.  These documents were provided to committee members as part of their agenda packets and made available to other persons attending the meeting.
   
5. Trans Bay DC Transmission Line Project presentation:  Mr. David Parquet of Babcock & Brown provided a power point presentation on the project.  Copies of the presentation were distributed to committee members and made available to others attending the meeting.  Mr. Parquet described the project, its location, its purpose and need, impacts and alternatives identified in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) now available for public review, and the overall project cost (approximately $300 million.)
   

   In response to committee members’ questions, Mr. Parquet and project staff explained in more detail the method to be used in laying the transmission line (hydroplow) and why its impacts are not considered significant (a relatively small amount of Bay mud, about 7,000 cubic yards, would be disturbed by the hydroplow installation method); alternative project sites in San Francisco and the advantages and disadvantages of each; project costs and how these would be paid from power transmission access fees levied throughout California; whether this proposal might be affected by or affect community choice aggregation in San Francisco (Mr. Parquet feels this proposal is neutral with respect to CCA.) 
   

6. Committee members discussed the proposal briefly but were not ready to make any formal recommendation about the project at this time.
   
7. Other than the written submissions received prior to the meeting, there was no public comment on this item.July 6
   
8. The Power Subcommittee will not meet in August.  It was agreed to postpone the September meeting one week to Tuesday, September 12, 2006.  A presentation and discussion of the energy aspects of the Treasure Island development will take place at that time.  Committee members would like to have a presentation and discussion about tidal power at their October meeting.
   
9. Meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m.