Operator: Welcome to the California Public Utilities Commission.
This is--(audio cuts out)
President Batjer: Operator. We can't hear you.
Operator: Welcome to the California Public Commission Public
Voting Meeting on this day, Thursday, May 7, 2020.
President Batjer: Alright. Good morning, everyone. We need to establish
a quorum before we begin the Commission meeting. So I'm
going to ask the agenda clerk to please call the roll.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Present.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Present.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Present.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Present.
Agenda Clerk: And President Batjer?
President Batjer: Present. Thank you, Janae, for calling the
roll. We have established a quorum. Welcome to the
California Public Utilities Commission. I am calling
this meeting of May 7, 2020, Public Agenda Number 3460
to order. Governor Gavin Newsom issued a stay-at-home
order to protect the health and well-being of all Californians
and to establish consistency across the state in order
to slow the spread of COVID-19. As such were conducting
today's business meeting online by remote participation.
This meeting is live streamed on CPUC website. You
can view the meeting at www.adminmonitor.com#ca
excuse me, /ca/cpuc AdminMonitor
is spelled A-D-M-I-N-M-O-N-I-T-O-R
dot com backslash CA backslash CPUC (www.adminmonitor.com/CA/CPUC)
Public engagement is critical to the CPUC process.
As the operators stated, please dial into 1-800-857-1917,
and enter pass code 5628905 and press *1 only.
If you wish to make a public comment. You will be placed
into a queue and will be called upon to speak when we
get to the Public Comment period of today's agenda.
Email comments received by 10 AM this morning will
be read by the Public Advisor, Allison Brown, during
the Public Comment period. Email comments received
after 10 AM will be distributed to the Commissioners
and senior management.
It's been about seven weeks since the statewide stay
at home order was issued. Using the latest indicators
Governor Newsom announced the move to Stage 2,
which would allow the gradual re-opening of lower-risk
workplaces. The Governor will release public health
guidance for certain Stage 2 sectors, including certain
retail manufacturing and logistics businesses.
Businesses and employers in those sectors will be able
to reopen as soon as Friday, which is tomorrow, if they
can meet the guidelines provided by the state and the
Governor. Other Stage 2 sectors, such as offices,
schools, and dine-in restaurants are not part of this
reopening but will be in a later phase. The Governor
also noted that counties can choose to continue more
restrictive measures in place, based on their local
conditions, and the state expects some counties to
keep their more robust stay-at-home orders in place
beyond May 8. Here at the CPUC, we are examining strategies
for when re-opening of the office can happen, and
what that may indeed entail. Executive Director
Stebbins is working with the Deputy Executive Directors
to explore necessary actions to take before employees
can return and steps needed to keep staff safe when
in the office. Whatever action we take will be in compliance
with state protocol and the guidelines. The latest
action by the Governor to reopen certain businesses
is encouraging. However, we must remain vigilant in
order to continue to bend and flatten the curve. We
must continue stay at home except for essential needs
and activities, practice social distancing, which means
at least six feet apart, wash hands with soap and water
for a minimum of 20 seconds, and avoid touching eyes,
nose, or mouth with unwashed hands.
The Commission understands that this crisis and its
impact to its customers will likely continue to
evolve. I want to assure the public that this agency
is committed to continuing to take the necessary actions
to match the urgency and the gravity of the issue at
hand. Finally, I would like to take a moment to thank
the CPUC staff. We truly have an incredibly dedicated
workforce, and I am extremely proud to be serving with
you. The transition to a new work reality has not been
easy, and you've proven to be adroit at adapting to
your new working environment while continuing to carry
out the Commission's responsibilities in a timely and
awesome manner. I am just in awe of the commitment
of the CPUC staff to making things work in the name
of the people we serve, and there are not enough venues
and opportunities to fully express my, and my fellow
Commissioners, appreciation. With that, I also want to
acknowledge that this is Public Service Recognition
Week. The pandemic has highlighted many great aspect
of our state and country, and one of them is a critical
role and difference made by public servants in times
of crisis. On behalf of the Commission I want, I would
like to express my gratitude to the hundreds of thousands
of public servants in the great state of California.
As the situation evolves, we will continue to communicate
with the public and stakeholders and work to ensure
the safe delivery of services Californians rely on
to conduct their daily lives. We will now turn to public
comment. The Commission provides two minutes, today,
two minutes, for each speaker. You will hear a bell
sound when your time is up. Let me repeat that: you
will have two minutes to speak, and you will hear a
bell ring when the time is up. To make public comments,
you may dial 1-800-857-1917, and enter 5628905,
and press *1. Email comments received by 10 Am
this morning will be read after we take the telephone
calls, they will be read by Public Advisor Brown. CPUC
rules do not allow for parties in proceedings to speak
about open proceedings. The public can make comments
addressing items on the consent and regular agendas,
including items not on the agenda. Please note that
there will not be public comment on items 14, 34, 35,
39, and any item on the closed session agenda. With
that guidance in mind, I welcome today's speakers.
I will now turn to the operator to open the public
comment telephone line. Operator, will you please introduce
the first caller?
Operator: The public comment lines are now open. The first call
that comes from Benjamin Bank, East Bay Democrats.
You--(audio cuts out)
President Batjer: Operator, you may need to speak up a little bit.
Operator: Do you hear me?
President Batjer: I can now. But you were faint earlier.
So would you please have the first speaker join us.
Have you opened that line?
Operator: Yes, Mr. Benjamin Banks,
East Bay Democrat Socialist of America.
Benjamin Banks: Hi. Good morning. Thank you for having me today
and for having this Public Comment period. I'm
calling in in response to the current PG&E
bankruptcy proceedings. So, since this Commission
holds power over PG&E and has an opportunity to
transform our energy system to one that meets the needs
of Californians in this time of crisis, especially
under COVID and climate change. I ask that you
reject PG&E's restructuring proposal. The
deal that they're putting in front of you will push
the cost of the bankruptcy on to fire victims and ratepayers,
and it will allow corporate executives and shareholders, who
are in charge, to continue making the decisions that
caused the fires in the first place. And there's
just no way we can trust PG&E to handle another
fire season, especially in the midst of COVID. So
we ask, or I ask, that you reject this terrible deal.
Please. Unless we can make some major changes that
truly protect survivors and ratepayers. Ratepayers
need to be protected and not forced to pay for the
failures of PG&E. So any plan should be amended
to ensure true ratepayer neutrality and no additional
charges should be added to ratepayer utility bills for
repayment of bonds, as was done in the previous Chapter
11 bankruptcy settlement. If ratepayers are forced to
pay the bankruptcy debt, they should be given a share
of ownership of the company to make decisions about
its finances.
I also ask that, in this moment of public health crisis,
vulnerable households be protected. Any plan should
recognize that energy is a Human Right under shelter
in place orders where people need to use electricity
for food, work and school, especially amidst loss of
ratepayer incomes due to the pandemic. And any plan should
include debt forgiveness for vulnerable households.
I echo the demand--(loud beeping drowns out voice)
President Batjer: That is a
signal that your time is up. If you could
if you could bring your remarks to a close, that
would be helpful.
Benjamin Banks: Sure. Then just quickly, any
deal for PG&E should put the needs of fire survivors
and the public first or it should be rejected. Thank
you.
President Batjer: Thank you. Operator, could you bring the next
caller on the line, please?
Operator: The next caller comes from Sean Lazarow. You may speak.
Shauna Lazarow?
Shauna Lazarow: Hi. Good. Yes. Good morning. This is Shauna
Lazarow with Communities for a Better Environment.
Thanks so much for your time this morning. And I hope
you all are well. I'm here to offer comment on
the PG&E OII proposed decisions. Full disclosure,
Communities for a Better Environment, along with Saha
and E-Pen, have moved for party status in that proceeding,
but we have not yet received a decision, so we're not
parties to the proceeding. So these comments are offered
in the spirit of public comment at the moment.
I wanted to take a moment this morning to address
some of the sort of stark flaws in the proposed decision
and the plan going forward. The PD, as you all know,
is proposing to prove PG&E's reorganization plan,
and one of the really serious concerns that Communities
for a Better Environment and our members have with
this reorganization plan is the conclusion that,
in general, the reorganization plan doesn't do
very much specifically or directly to affect local
communities. That's a big flaw. The PD identifies it.
It still proposes to approve that
plan. There's a mandate in this proceeding, a statutory
mandate, that this reorganization be beneficial overall
to the communities in the area served by PG&E.
So our communities, our environmental justice communities,
our disadvantaged communities in PG&E territory are
already bearing the brunt--(loud bell)--the electricity system and
the reorganization--(loud bell)--be adopted--(loud bell)--
solutions to these communities. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you
very much. Operator. The next caller, please.
Operator, could you bring on the next caller, please?
Robert, could you check and see if we have lost connection
with the operator?
Robert: Yes. President Batjer, the next
caller is Katarina Gaines. Youth versus Apocalypse.
President Batjer: Thank you.
Katarina Gaines: Hi. Can you hear me?
Yes. We can. Please go forward.
Katarina Gaines: Hi. My name is Katarina Gaines, and I'm calling
in regards to the PG&E bankruptcy response and
reorganization plan. And I hope that you reject
it because we need a different PG&E because the
current one has proved on many occasions to be dangerous and
unaccountable. PG&E needs to be held responsible for
the immense impact it has on people in California.
And they need to compensate wildfire survivors
fully for the utility damage that they caused. California
wildfires are proven to grow far more dangerous with
the climate crisis. And we're seeing that now. PG&E
needs to start a just transition to clean energy
because it is our only realistic option for the future
and the price of inaction will heavily outweigh immediate
action. We are already seeing the beginning of the
transition. In 2018, coal consumption was the lowest
it has been in 40 years. And last April, renewables
generated more electricity, even
coal, for the first time. Fossil fuels are a dying industry.
The transition is happening, and I am asking PG&E
to allow it to happen in time. It is terrifying to
imagine the future of the planet and my entire generation
destroyed by the climate crisis. No one deserves to
live in the world that the scientists warn us up with the
cost of inaction. You have the power to control whether
future generations learn from our most fatal and critical
mistakes, or whether they learn about how we saved
everyone and everything on this planet. This is in
your power. And I hope that the choices you make today
reflect the facts that we have been told by the scientists.
And I hope that you're protecting the people who need
protection. And I hope that you hold PG&E accountable
for their actions. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Miss Gaines
Could we have the next caller?
Operator or Robert? Could you call the next caller,
please?
Robert: Yes. The next caller is Lincoln Oliver
O'Neil. He is with Sunrise Movement.
Lincoln Oliver O'Neil: Hello. Good morning, Commissioners. And everyone who
has called in. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
My name is Lincoln Oliver O' Neil and I organize
with the Sunrise Movement. We are a movement of young
people across the country who are working to make climate
change an urgent priority across America, end the exploitive
and extractive influence of corporate executives on
our politics, and support leaders who stand up for the
health and well being of all people. I'm speaking to
you today to urge you to reject the current plan of
restructuring for PG&E. In this moment, the Commission
holds a great deal of power over PG&E, power that
did not come easily. We're here because Californians
have been burned, blown up, suffocated and left without
power. We're here because PG&E has demonstrated
that a system that relies on turning a profit to be
safe does not work. I'd like to recognize the tremendous
effort that the government, the Governor's office and
affiliates have been doing to meet the COVID-19 crisis.
Electricity is what allows us to shelter in place,
allowing us to adapt to the current crisis. And in
this light, it is more clear than ever that electricity
is a matter of public safety and a human right. However,
19% of California's workforce have been forced to file
for unemployment due to this crisis. California's electricity
rates are already some of the highest in the country,
and it put a great strain on our communities. This
plan needs to protect the vulnerable communities by
including debt forgiveness for electricity bills and
prevent PG&E from shifting the cost of their negligence
and poor planning on to ratepayers. We echo the demands
of the Reclaim Our Power Campaign. Any PG&E deal
needs to put the needs of fire survivors and the public
first, or it must be rejected. Thank you for your time.
President Batjer: Thank you,
Mr. O'Neil. Could we please have the next
caller
Operator: The next caller, Helena Bareki from Sunrise
Movement.
Helena Bareki: Good morning. I'm Helena Bareki. I volunteer
with the Sunrise Movement and I'm also with Climate
Reality Project and I'm a California resident. I echo
the comments of everybody who's talked so far. And
this call also regards the PG&E bankruptcy proceedings,
and I urge the Commission to reject the current deal.
We need a significantly different PG&E, quite simply,
because the current PG&E is a felon convicted
on multiple occasions of multiple counts of manslaughter.
Most recently responsible for 85 deaths in the Paradise
Camp fire.
Your Commission has the power to change what's expected
of PG&E and other utilities, and an opportunity to
help California transform our energy system to one
that meets our needs in this time of twin, COVID
and climate change, crises. As it stands, the deal in
front of you pushes the cost of PG&E's bankruptcy
onto fire survivors and ratepayers, while keeping corporate
executives and shareholders in charge, allowing them
to continue making the decisions that start the fires
in the first place is not acceptable. Any deal for
PG&E needs to ensure that the public is truly protected,
including changes such as making sure that impacted
communities, including wildfires survivors, be fully
compensated for utility damages. The plan needs to
guarantee payment in cash, not in volatile PG&E
stock tied up in a trust that victims cannot even control.
It's simply wrong to tie the future well being of people
to the fortunes of the company that literally sent
their lives and livelihood up in flames only a couple
of years ago. Wouldn't it make more sense to rehabilitate
the utility based on the will of the people? Californians
want and need a transformation of the energy system
based on clean zero carbon energy and decentralized
production and transmission. Without mitigating future
climate change--(loud ring)--common energy and responding
to the realities of current climate change that we
need (ring) decentralized transmission. We cannot keep people (ring) safe
I echo the demands of Reclaim Our Power. And thank you very much
for listening (ring).
President Batjer: Thank you very much for your comment. Could we move
on now to the next caller, please?
Operator: The next call? Eleanor
Thomas with Sunrise Movement.
Eleanor Thomas: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Eleanor
and I organized with Sunrise Movement. I'm calling
today to ask that the CPUC reject the current plan to
restructure PG&E. PG&E needs to be held accountable
for the destruction caused by the fires and the power
outages. We ratepayers need rigorous independent and
democratic oversight over our utility provider to ensure
that our safety is put above profit. I also echo
the demands of Reclaim Our Power to reject this
deal. Thank you for your time.
President Batjer: Thank you for your comments.
Appreciate it. The next caller, please.
Operator: The next
comment comes from Griffin Walsh with Sunrise.
Griffin Walsh: Yeah. Hey, thank you for this time and giving me
the opportunity to put public comment. My name is Griffin
Walsh with Sunrise Movement. I also wanted to
say that the time, right now, really is kind
of unprecedented in that it took fires and bankruptcy
and a lot of suffering to gain power over restructuring
PG&E, over a really entrenched system and, like, the infrastructure.
And I think the instinct right now in COVID
is to just push things through. But we really need
to protect each other. And it's really the time not
to just, like, step forward with the status quo, but
like, realize how we can move forward. And, for
that reason, I want to reject the deal. I ask to
reject the deal. Some of the things that I think
we need to do, especially in COVID, is to
make sure energy is like a public utility.
People can really count on it. In a time like this of crisis,
no one should be getting their energy shut off. I think a deal needs,
for example, include that, during crisis, people need
to have energy as a right. And also, just generally support
system.
And to support our most vulnerable. Yeah. And
just to reiterate, I support Reclaim Our Power and
ask to shut down the PG&E deal. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Mr Walsh. Could we have the next caller. Please
Operator: Gina Barragan with Youth Versus Apolcalpyse.
Gina Barragan: Can every hear me?
President Batjer: I think you're a little faint. You might
want to speak up.
Gina Barragan: How about now?
President Batjer: Better.
Gina Barragan: So, hi, my name is Gina
Barragan. I'm a youth, and I'm with Youth
versus Apocalypse. So basically I want to ask you
guys if we can, we need a different view because in this
moment of the public health crisis, vulnerable household
needs to be protected. We need to act now because problems
are very high on public health with the pandemic. For example,
many people aren't working right now, and we shouldn't
have to worry about our energy providers giving an energy
source that could potentially harm us. Based on, like, shutoffs
or increase of fires. Any plan should include debt
forgiveness for vulnerable households. We should act now
to make a change and not accept this deal. Personally,
for me, being from a low-income community, I can see
like, harmful effects already happening in the community
due to, like, air pollution increase. And with the air
pollution, the fires that are currently, that reoccur,
it harms my community with air pollution.
We need energy as of right now, so everyone
can have a reliable source and not a disadvantage,
because energy is a basic necessity for food and school.
For example, now that all my classes are online, I should
be able to have a reliable energy source.
Another thing is Californians need to, a true safety from utility
caused fires, smoke, and shutoffs. The power shut off from last
fall affected me, especially because I was on a school
trip, and we all had to adjust differently, our whole system, because
we were away. And we needed that energy, but we had a
hard time. As we were trying to contact our loved ones
back home. We shouldn't have to deal with this. Right
now, as a Commission, you have that power to change
that and allow a safer source of electricity. Not
only that, but the increase in fires is impacting my community
again because fires burn, and then, they cause more
smoke and air pollution. And then they cause
more health effects. The air pollution in my community
of East Palo Alto is already bad. This increase of fires
can potentially threaten children and people
as well as pregnant women and others at risk due to
health issues--(ring)--for medically vulnerable
households, comprehensive community engagement--(ring)--
my communities. I like to finish by
saying I echo the demands of Reclaim Our Power
campaign. Any PG&E--(ring)--need
the fire survivors and public first. Thank
you for your time.
President Batjer: Thank you very much for your comments
May we please have the next caller.
Steve Unger with
Local Clean Energy Alliance.
Steve Onger: Good morning. Thank you for letting me speak today.
I want to echo all the comments made by all the speakers
opposing this reorganization of PG&E. I agree with
them completely. I am a 25 year member of several labor
unions. I am a union member and also an advocate for
clean energy and climate justice. I also want to add
that this plan will continue to reward those that profit
from PG&E's negligence. It will continue to punish
those who suffer, including frontline communities,
those impacted by wildfires. And it will not help the
PG&E workers either. They will continue to be
blamed for the failures of their employers. Reject
this reorganization plan. Thank you very much.
President Batjer: Thank
you, sir. May we please have the next caller.
Operator: Isa Clarke
with Youth and Apocalypse.
Lisa Clark: Hello, Good morning. My name is Lisa Clark, and I am
the high school student in Oakland, and I'm also a
part of Youth Versus Apocalypse. We cannot continue to
allow PG&E to function how it has in the past
because those practices have caused them to go bankrupt
and have cost the lives of too many Californians. So
I'm acting you to reject the deal with PG&E. I
lived in West Oakland, which is a community that is
predominantly low income and of color. We have fatality
rates of heart disease, stroke and lung cancer that
are higher than the county average, and we have asthma
rates that are twice the county average. This health
prosperity is the result of poor air quality and other
manifestations of environmental racism. I say this
to say that the residents of West Oakland and many
other frontline communities in California do not have
the luxury of waiting for the next incident caused
by PG&E to happen. Neither do fire survivors or
those seriously injured or killed by the shutoff. We
suffer the most at the expense of PG&E. Please, do
not give them another opportunity to harm me and my
community. I echo the demands of the Reclaim Our
Power campaign and say and ask you to please reject
the deal with PG&E. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Miss Clark. The next caller, please.
Operator: Caroline Chin with Asian Pacific
Caroline Chin: Hi. This is Caroline
Chin with the Asian Pacific Environmental
Network, also calling with comments on the PG&E proposed
decision. It's super clear that PG&E has failed to operate
safely to address public safety and climate change.
And like those before me, have said, unfortunately,
as it stands, this plan will allow corporate executives
and shareholders to continue making the types of decisions
that caused the fires in the first place. So we are
really calling on you to reject this deal unless you make
major changes in order to truly protect survivors and
ratepayers. In this moment of public health crisis, first
vulnerable households need to be protected. The plan
should recognize that energy is a human right, which
is always true, but especially under shelter and place
orders, where we're all even more reliant on electricity
from everything for food to school to connecting to
resources. This plan should really include debt forgiveness
for vulnerable households. Ratepayers also need protection
moving forward and shouldn't be forced to pay for the failures
of PG&E. The plan should be amended to ensure
true ratepayer neutrality that accounts for contributions
that ratepayers have already made. This year is also on
course to be the world's hottest since measurements
began. So we desperately need a clean, decentralized
energy system. The CPUC should provide a mechanism
for a transition of ownership to a model that is accountable
to ratepayers and workers if PG&E fails to successfully
emerge from bankruptcy. This transition should be transparent
equitable and immune to PG&E's attempt to delay.
It should also authorize the CPUC Disadvantaged
Community Advisory Committee to lay the groundwork
for a utility to replace PG&E.
We echo the demands of the Reclaim Our Power Campaign.
It's really clear that any PG&E deal needs to put
the needs of fire survivors and the public first. Or
it must be rejected. Thank you so much for your time.
President Batjer: Thank you for your comments. Operator, please, may we
have the next caller.
Operator: Mary Rose with Reclaim Our Power
Utility Justice campaign.
Mary Rose: Good morning. This is Mary Rose Tarook with Reclaim
Our Power campaign. I'm the coordinator and proud to
be part of a river of dozens of speakers today and
tens of thousands organizing for utility justice because
we believe there is an opportunity now to rebuild our
energy system under the PG&E bankruptcy. The deal
that you have, the plan of reorganization with PG&E,
is unacceptable to us. We know that we're gonna work
hard to keep all of our communities intact through
the climate crisis through, through the PG&E crisis, and we
need you, we know the power that you have as the CPUC
to help bring these great ideas from communities into
the fore, into this plan of reorganization, and create
the opportunity for us to reimagine and rebuild an
energy systems that meet the needs of people. So we've
been studying this plan of reorganization, and we know
it's complex. PG&E disaster is looming just beyond,
very closely, and into the fire season, just beyond this
pandemic crisis. So some of the ideas that we would
love to see you include in an alternative or revised
plan includes,
stronger strong wildfire safety metrics and robust
requirements for utility wildfire mitigation plans,
including replacing aged power lines, upgrades upon failure,
and implementing indigenous fire management practices.
The native folks here on this land that we call California
now have thousands of years of wisdom, and we could
really use their wisdom now, in our fire season. We want
to see a plan that ensurers true ratepayer neutrality.
We want to see a plan that guarantees immediate payment
of claims in cash and not volatile PG&E stock
(ring)--plan that recognizes that energy is a human right--(ring)--is
a human right.
And with that, we we urge you to reject the current
deal and get us a better deal. Yes, you can. Yes, you
can. If you step lively and get us a better deal. Thank
you.
President Batjer: Thank you for your comments. Operator, may we
have the next caller?
Operator: Tara Goody, Youth versus Apocalypse.
Sara Goody: Hi. Can you hear me?
President Batjer: Yes, we can.
Sara Goody: Good morning. My name
is Sarah Goody. I am 15 years old and I organized with
Youth versus Apocalypse. As a young person, I'm scared
for my future. This climate crisis is taking away my
right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,
and by passing the deal in its current state, you're
telling me that my life and the lives of the people
around me don't matter. Every year, when the California
wildfires start, I don't know what to do other than
worry about which community will be hit next. I have
friends and family that have been impacted by fires
in Santa Rosa. Do you know how terrifying it is to
get a call at one in the morning that my friend just
evacuated her neighborhood and is now driving down
the highway in traffic, as flames are everywhere and they
are just trying to survive. Thousands of families have
been impacted by these fires, and thousands more will
be if this committee passes this deal in its current
state. I have asthma, and I've been hospitalized, year
after year, when these fires occur. Last year, I sat with
my family in the blackout, wondering when that would stop.
earlier this year, I was in my dance class when we
heard sirens and the sirens kept coming. I cannot share
with you how frightening it is to sit in silence, waiting
to be evacuated. I am just 15. And knowing that I might
have to live with these fires for the rest of my life
is beyond terrifying. There is no way to describe the
fear I feel. Please show me that you care about my
generation and that you will prioritize the safety
of my community by not passing the deal. Because any
PG&E deal needs to put the needs of fire survivors
and the public first. Or it must be rejected. Thank
you for your time.
President Batjer: Thank you for your comments. Operator,
the next caller, please.
Operator: Trey Vasquez, Movement Generation.
You may speak.
Trey Vasquez: Hello, bueos dias, good morning. My name is Trey Vasquez,
with Movement Generation this morning. And I'm also
a resident in Santa Rosa, California, and having survived
two wildfires and multiple shutoffs, I want to express
to you all that I am deeply concerned about this summer
and this fall and what this season hold for us
as we look at the impact of COVID on our community
plus upcoming shut off and wildfires. What will we do when
more shut offs but we need water, electricity to take
the necessary health precautions to protect ourselves.
What if were evacuated in the fall when the reemergence
of COVID is predicted to be in full effect.
I'm speaking to you today because this Commission has
the power to change PG&E and have an opportunity to
transform our energy system into one that not only works
for California but will start pir lives. The deal, as of
now, pushes the cost of PG&E's bankruptcy on fire survivors
and ratepayers that we cannot and should not have to pay
for. The deal allows corporate executives and shareholders
to continue making decisions that will inevitably lead
to more fires, and we cannot pay for these decisions out
of our pockets and with our lives. We're not only asking
you to reject this deal, we're asking you for your help, help
save our communities and families that are facing a
grave future and already looking at a grave present
moment. You have the power to includes major changes
that protect survivors and ratepayers. We're asking
you to consider that we need true safety from utility
called fire shutoffs. Any plan has to institute strong
wildfire safety metrics and strict requirements for
utility wildfire mitigation plan, including replacing
aged power lines, upgrade or immediately deenergize
infrastructure upon failure, and implementing indigenous
fire management practices as Mary Rose said. We're also
asking that be ratepayers protected and not be forced
to continue to pay for the failed years of PG&E, especially
in this time when we can't afford it. Any plan should
be amended to ensure true ratepayer neutrality. Thank
you. Please do not approve this plan.
President Batjer: Thank you very much for your comments. Operator, the
next caller, please,
Operator: Ed Smelov. Please state your organization.
Ed Smelov: Good morning, Commissioners. This is Ed Smelov with
Book Solar and I'm speaking today in support of Item
number 13 on your agenda, which would authorize the
new standard offer contract for renewable energy projects
of 20 megawatts or less and bring California into compliance
with the Public Utility Regulatory Policies
Act, or better known by its acronym of PURPA. It's
been almost 2.5 years, and now, since the federal court
ruled the California was not in compliance with PURPA,
and the decision before you today corrects that deficiency
while balancing the need to protect ratepayers through
a market based method for establishing avoided costs.
It also will provide developers in qualified facilities
a reasonable opportunity to develop new renewable energy
projects that will help California meet its climate
goals. California has a long history of implementing
PURPA in a way that has helped transform the electric
power industry into one that relies on competition
and markets to drive new technology development. It's
time to reinvigorate PURPA with the proposed standard
offer contract decision that will offer predictable
market based compensation for new community-scale
renewable energy projects. There's a lot of pent up
demand for community-scale renewable energy projects.
As you know, the three major investor-owned utilities
have not conducted renewable portfolio standard solicitations
for 4, 5, 6 years, and the renewable market adjusting
tariffs program, REMAT, has been suspended since December
2017. After considerable progress through 2016, California's
renewable energy development has been on a long pause.
Some community choice aggregation entities are now
stepping up their renewable procurement. Nonetheless
California needs to do more to meet our important goals.
Your decision today can can help put us back on the
path to building community scale solar in the right
places across the--(ring) I want to thank Judge Allen and Commissioner
Rechtschaffen (ring) for working through the process and
urge you to adopt item number 13. (ring)
President Batjer: Thank you very much for your comments. Operator, please
bring the next commentor online.
Operator: Najic Altman.
Please state your organization
Najic Altman: DSA.
Yes. Commissioners, I'm a mother, grandmother,
and lifelong activist. And I'm really deeply moved
that our young people have done the research, have
believed in a democracy, have written these speeches,
appeal to you for their very lives and futures.
We have spoken to you repeatedly about the failures
PG&e. This is a critical time for humanity. Humanity
and the young people are appealing to you. I know
for a fact that PG&E me has continued to get away with
profits over people since they started. I don't know
what to say anymore to you people, except I beg you to
be great people right now and listen to these young
people and use your experience to bring us true public
utilities that are owned by the state of California.
San Francisco was always supposed to own the public
utilities. PG&E has bribed politicians for over 100
years against the Raker Act. I've done my research.
These young people have. This is an opportunity to
create a public utility. PG&E is a felon. A murderer.
What do you feel about that? Do you want to live this
life out saying you helped the transition for these
young people to not face an apocalypse? I mean, how
can you listen to these words and ever possibly not
support them? It breaks my heart. I hope I'm touching
yours. Please do not fail them. Do not fail our future.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you very much. Operator, the next
caller, please.
Operator: David McCord on behalf of himself.
David McCord: This is David McCord. I live in El Serrito.
And as we work on the PG&E's wildfire mitigation,
the Commission needs to require PG&E to focus not
on trees, but on its transmission and distribution
infastructure. Keeping vegetation the required distance
from lines is important, but it's the electricity in
the lines that starts fires. A perfect example. The
Camp Fire sparks from a transmission tower and his
dry grass and an open field. A worn C-clamp
that hadn't been replaced in ages failed and let a
conductor hit the tower, causing the sparks. As a personal
note, the fire burned my roommates' brother out of his
home in Paradise. Besides keeping the infrastructure
in good repair, PG&E needs to install locks and
remote sensors and false interrupters. San Diego Gas
and Electric has been doing this. Why can't PG&E? In
wooded areas, replace skinny six gauge distribution
conductors with steel core insulated lines that will
resist breaking. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Mr McCord. Could we have the next caller
please?
Operator: Jonathan with Sunrise Moment.
Jonathan Coacher: Thank you. Good morning, Commissioners. My name
is Jonathan Coacher and I organized with Sunrise Movement
Bay Area, and I'm a rank and file member of ISPT
Local 21. Californians need a transformational energy
system based on clean and decentralized energy model
in order to deal with the climate crisis. Large centralized
systems increase the risk of climate-related wildfires
by requiring transmission infrastructure that runs
through the urban-rural interface, where increased
fuel load and drier conditions is a perfect recipe for what
occurred in both Santa Rosa and Paradise. Additionally,
we need systems that are clean and renewable to prevent
further increase of carbon emissions in our atmosphere
which is worsening the climate crisis. Please reject
the current deal to restructure PG&E and I echo
the demands of the Reclaim Our Power campaign. Thank
you.
President Batjer: Thank you.
Next caller, please.
Operator: Darrow Gail, Citizen of Los Angeles.
Darrow Gail: Hello. Thank you. Good morning, Commissioners. I'm
living in Los Angeles and in the first week of May, it's
already in the high eighties, so we're kind of scared
that we're gonna have a really long, hot summer down
here. But I am concerned about item number four on
the agenda. I'm very much opposed to this resolution
Why? I repeat, why are these aging and brittle, dangerous
Diablo Canyon reactors, which should have been inspected
and then deCommissioned years ago, being proposed for
CCAs? No community wants this liability. PG&E,
you can't prop up a rotting dead dinosaur indefinitely.
Commissioners, please take note. The citizens and ratepayers
of California do not trust PG&E at all. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you. Next caller, please.
Operator: Barbara Stebbins, California
Alliance Community. You may speak.
Barbara Stebbins: My name is Barbara Stebbins. I'm here today representing
the California Alliance for Community Energy to urge
Commissioners to reject PG&E's reorganization plan.
We stand with the Reclaim Our Power demands and their
suggestions for items that absolutely need
to be included in any reorganization plan. We know
that you have tremendous power in the decision to
determine the future of energy in Northern California.
We advocate with community choice energy programs throughout
California to prioritize and develop local clean energy
resources as a way to address environmental issues
as well as social and racial justice and inequity within
communities. Because community trace programs are
governed by elected officials, local elected officials,
their primary responsibility is to their customers
not shareholders. These programs have already shown
leadership in addressing energy resilience due to the
development of local clean energy research and building
economic strength at the same time. But this is one
more reason to reject PG&E's reorganization plan.
That company has done everything it can to impede and
destroy community choice programs throughout their
territory.
So we face so many perils due to the impact of climate
change, communities throughout PG&E territory went
without power for days, even when those communities
where nowhere near wildfire threats. People in many
of these communities are already juggling the costs
of rent, health care and utilities. They cannot accord
to lose a refrigerator's worth of food or be without
essential medical equipment or work because of power
shutoffs. Community choice programs can and should create
solutions to those shutoff problems. (ring) But we have no doubt,
if PG&E is allowed to reincarnate in the spitting
image of their past, (ring) it will only impede any progress
towards energy justice in California. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Miss Stebbins. The next caller, please.
Operator: Willie
Mayburns, can you please state your organization?
Will Abrams: Yes. Hi. This is Will Abrams. I very much appreciate
being able to participate in this public comment period,
and I want to extend my appreciation for President
Batjer and the Commissioners and the whole Commission
and the work that you do. I think that it's during
these times that we really need to appreciate our public
servants, and I am so appreciative every day of the
work that you and your staff does. Additionally, I'm
especially appreciative of the public engagement with
the Commission. I can tell you firsthand that
public engagement is not always welcomed in public participation
and proceedings related to these issues aren't always
welcome. And I think it's particularly heartwarming
to hear the voices here today speaking on a number
of issues. I would say that there, overall, in the
issues that the Commission is dealing with right now,
especially under COVID, there is an effort to say
that now is not the time to deal with the very many
urgent issues of the Commission. And I would just urge
the Commission to consider that now is the time and
that there is no more road to kick the can down.
And I would encourage you to address the urgency of
our time with urgent actions on a number of issues.
I support you. I know the voices on this call, in terms
of the public participants, also support you, and I
just really want to again thank you all for your work.
I would also like to call your attention to agenda
number four on the consent calendar. Specifically,
carbon free procurement. Especially, given all of the
wildfires, that are going on, I think really needs
to be looked at a bit differently. And there needs
to be a look at the other side of the ledger when
we're starting to calibrate something as carbon-free.
In 2017 alone, there was 37.1 metric tons of CO2
released into the (ring) atmosphere. So to consider that carbon
free, in terms of how (ring) we're looking at this, I think
is, needs another look. (ring)
<v President Batjer>Thank you, Mr
Abrams. Could we go on to the next caller
please?
Operator: Yes. Simon with Youth versus Apocalypse,
you may go.
Simon: Hi, my name is Simon. I'm a youth, and I'm in high school
and I ask you to reject PG&E's new proposed plan
of restructurings because it doesn't even save money
for the company. I'm sad to learn of their plan. I
want to tell everyone a story. Last year, when Paradise
was on fire, it was on everyone's mind. As we heard
that people who live there had to evacuate. My English
teacher shared to us how it was affecting her life because
her family lived nearby. I was really affected by
her story, and I didn't know what I could do. My education
was weighed down by a morbid mistake PG&E made.
It's scary to see one of my role models so vulnerable
and see her family's safety at the whim of a money
saving choice. And then, when the electricity was cut
this year, I truly felt that PG&E had abandoned
me as a citizen. It was really an eye opening experience
when I learned that PG&E was not a government-owned,
that is not government-owned but a private business.
And then,
it seemed to me they would rather save money than
lives. They then tried to ease the fire victims lives
by giving them stock in a company that they had nothing,
that they wanted to do nothing.
That they wanted nothing to do with. Their new plan
should include renewable energy, such as solar energy.
This takes money but saves lives. Please. If you want
to be responsible for the lives of people who burn
alive, then make a move to pass the deal. However,
the people are watching. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you. Operator,
the next caller, please.
Operator: Francis Faraclaw, please
state your organization.
Francis: Hello?
President Batjer: Hello, we can hear you. Go ahead.
Francis: Awesome. My name is
Francis, I'm with Sierra Club. I'm sorry. This is
kind of tricky to navigate, but I'm glad that we were
able to actually do this. I'm an organizer with Sierra
Club, out in Southern California, with the My Generation
Campaign. We're really actually just coming out
here, not to actually talk about PG&E, although
we think it's super important. We're actually here
to talk about the rates and the different ways that
these utilities are charging us during the COVID-19
Pandemic. Of course, we really appreciate initiatives
you taken to expand programs like CARE and FAIR, but
we're here to tell you that this is not enough. We
know that people are still falling through the cracks
and the very different ways of these utilities are
actually cleverly trying to charge their customers.
And so, more than anything, we just want to highlight
to you that these fuel assistance programs are still
insufficient and that, even though you're proposing
to change the actual rate from the 75% of the 25%,
we really want you to think about how you're aiding
the most vulnerable of the forefront. It's our understanding
that, even though you might change these small little
things, ultimately people are still facing huge bills
and at the end of the pandemic, they're gonna be facing
this monumental aggregate bill that we just don't
think that anybody should really pay. So please, look
at how you can actually support these programs, how
you can expand them, and also you can make them accessible
because the most vulnerable, as we all know, are not
in the know about what's going on here. And let
alone, if they did, they mostly don't have confidence
that the utilities are going to help. That's
really all I have to say, but please listen to the
kids and everybody else who's on this call. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you. The next caller, please.
Operator: The next caller is
Mark Hall, Electricity Equals. You may state.
Mara Call: Good morning. Can you hear me?
President Batjer: Yes, we can.
Mara Call: Hello.
My name is Mara Call on and I'm with Electricity Equals
Life, and we're a small grassroots organization of
people with disabilities. We formed last year when faced
with public safety power shutoffs, and our goals
include both disability and climate justice. So,
sadly, people with disabilities are more likely to
be left behind to die during power, during the wildfires,
and were more likely to experience life threatening
loss of electricity during the power shutoffs. And were
also least able to pay for rising utility rates. So
we worry about the deal before you today. It won't
make us safer. For many of us, these are actually very
life and death issues. The fact of the matter is that we
don't trust PG&E. During the past year, they've
done nothing to earn the trust. They have no plan to
get back up power to the thousands of us on medical
baseline, and now, as we fight COVID, situation worsens.
Even more of us will need oxygen ventilators, power
for wheelchairs and elevators. And so we ask, what's
the plan?
Several years ago, I happened upon PG&E's so-called
wildfire mitigation efforts in action. Instead
of careful tree trimming, I saw what could only be
described as a linear, clear cutting of scores of beautiful,
carbon-storing, mature trees, many of them well away from
the power lines. If this is representative of their
approach, and I believe it is, we're indeed trouble because
the Earth really needs those trees. PG&E has a big PR
machine, an army of well-paid lobbyists, a fundamental
commitment to maximize the bottom line. You can see
the fruits of that fact by the plan now before you.
This plan is flawed and abandoned the people and the
planet. It does nothing to further the imperatives
of climate justice. We're running out of time. The
Reclaim Our Power campaign is here to fight for the
people, for democracy and further planet. We support
their vision. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you. Operator, the next
caller, please.
Operator: Gabriella with North Bay Organizing
Project, you may speak.
Gabriella: Yes. Good morning. My name is Gabriella Orontez. I'm
a digest recovery fellow for the Latino Community Foundations
Just Recovery Partnership. Today, I am here on behalf
of the North Bay Organizing Project, one of the 10
nonprofit organizations in Sonoma and Napa counties
that came together as the Just Recovery Partnership
after the 2017 wildfires. I bring with me today the
voices and experiences of renters, of the undocumented,
of limited English speakers and the community organizations
that respond to the most vulnerable during the devastation
caused by fires and power shutoffs. With the power
that the Commission holds over PG&E, it has
the opportunity to transform our energy system to
one that meat the needs of Californians in this time
of crisis under COVID and climate change. As it
stands, the deal in front of you will push the cost
of PG&E's bankruptcy onto fire survivors and ratepayers,
while keeping corporate executives and shareholders
in charge, allowing them to continue making the decisions
that caused the fires in the first place. We need you
to reject this terrible deal unless you make some of
the changes, major changes, that truly protect survivors
and ratepayers. For example, any plan should include
comprehensive community engagement processes with frontline
communities and requirement for utility compensation
of customers for their financial losses during shut
off. And this includes debt forgiveness for vulnerable
households. Last night, I participated in a wild fire
safety webinar that PG&E put on for Sonoma
and Napa Counties. I want to share with you what
Vanessa Brian, manager with PG&E at Local Customer
Experience team, said last night when
the facilitators were asked about compensation
from loss of food, loss of work, etcetera from public
safety power shutoffs occurring during shelter in
place. She told us last night, and I quote, "at this
"time we, PG&E, are not compensating or reimbursing
"customers for loss of work because of power shutoffs."
This is truly
disheartening--(ring)--response and shows how
PG&E--(ring)--
comprehensive community engagement processes with frontline
communities. Because if they were, then Vanessa Brian
--(ring)--
in response to the reality we are facing. We don't
all work out of our home--
President Batjer: May I ask you to bring
your comments to a close here? You're beyond your two
minute timeframe.
Gabriella: Sure, and, we need to be able to rely
on some sort of debt forgiveness, and we ask that this
be included in any kind of reorganization plan. We
need to be truth, we need to safety from utility
caused fires, smokes and shutoff. And in this moment
of public health crisis, vulnerable households need
to be protected. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you. Thank you. Operator,
please. The next caller.
Operator: Kathy Lurch Buddhist Peace Fellowship.
Katie Long: Hello? Can you hear me?
President Batjer: Yes, we can.
Katie Long: Hi, My name is
Katie Long. Good morning. I'm with the Buddhist Peace
Fellowship. I want to echo all the appreciation of
the CPUC and offer this poem to reject the PG&E
bankruptcy deal.
Please reject the current deal. PG&E's attempt
to steal a bailout from ratepayer funds. A better deal
can sure be won. Protecting home from raging fires,
reducing rolling blackouts dire. Transitioning to power
clean, democratizing public means. Restoring earth with
deeper plans for native stewardship of lands that carbon
credits cannot heal. Please don't be fooled. Reject
this deal. When medicines and freezers melt, and smoke
in lungs is choking felt, PG&E forfeits our
trust. As our world changes, change we must. Please
use your powers, fair and wise, to boldly help a future
rise. A safe, clean energy for all. This is our wish.
This is our call. Thank you for supporting the CPUC
Disadvantaged Community Advisory Committee to continue
leading the way towards this vision for a better deal
and a better utility to replace PG&E. The people
and lands of California deserve no less. Thank you
for your commitment and your efforts.
President Batjer: Thank you.
Next caller, please.
Operator: Comes from Audrey Ichinose
East Bay Clean power.
Audrey: Hi, I'm Audrey Ichinose
from representing East Bay Clean Power Alliance.
We are a coalition, a loose coalition, of about 60 organizations
that share commitment to local clean energy development
and, like other speakers have said these are unprecedented
at times. But these times present you Commissioners
with a rare opportunity to fundamentally impact our
energy infrastructure. I'll briefly say that there's
an OpEd piece into this morning San Francisco Chronicle
that, to me, exemplifies the kind of undaunted positive
response that we could have, that we need in times
like this. The authors propose a dry brush removal
force to both mitigate summer's coming wildfire danger
and at the same time, to employ the newly unemployed,
both urban and rural. And it's a practical plan that
you know, that could be implemented quickly
and broadly. So the CPUC should do the same kind of,
have the same kind of thinking, mindset, in its decision
on PG&E's plan to exit bankruptcy. I believe that
the CPUC needs to make two broad changes to the
plan before they approve it. PG&E should be required
to narrow its operational focused. It should concentrate
on the safe transmission of power, focusing mainly
on the big high-power transmission lines as opposed
to the local distribution networks. Secondly, PG&E
should be required to work with the many community
choice aggregators that now operate in its service
territory. One of the most dubious elements of this
PG&E, of the PG&E's plan, is their proposal to divide
its service territory into five subregions answerable
to the top. On the face of it, well, it's supposed
to improve the company's contacts, familiarity with
local conditions. (ring) As you can see, oh,
shoot. So anyway (ring) I want to point out.
that CCAs are exploding in PGA&E territory and their
reorganization plan should incorporate
these local organizations. I mean, they're so important,
and they can be so useful. So Commissioners, please
use this--(ring).
Thank you very much.
President Batjer: Thank you. Operator, the next caller
please.
Operator: The next caller comes from Miss Michelle with Movement
Generation.
Miss Michelle: Hi. Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you for hearing
beautiful and powerful set of voices this morning.
I'm with Movement Generation Justice and Ecology
Project. My name's Michelle Moscarenez-Swan,
for the record. Wwe're also proud to be part of Reclaim
Our Power. And I'm a mama of kids who are also very concerned
about their future. If the climate crisis didn't
already make this clear, this global pandemic does.
We're in the midst of a transition, and who leads that
transition is going to determine how it goes and where
we end up. Black, indigenous, poor, working class,
disabled, and immigrant communities need to lead this
transition. Those are the voices you're hearing today.
And they're calling for a rejection to this deal. Don't
let PG&E lead the transition to an apocalyptic future
that the young people on this call, mostly with Youth
versus Apocalypse, are missing school to guard against.
In this COVID crisis, we're seeing government official
faced to choose between making money or saving lives,
people or profit. What kind of leader are you gonna
be in this moment? Ultimately,
we need a just transition to a worker and community
controlled, decentralized energy system because we
all know that energy is a human right. So I urge you
to reject the current bankruptcy reorganization deal.
PG&E is guilty of criminal negligence, and as
the judge in this proceeding has named, they have not
shown any progress in shifting out of this negligence
and taking real responsibility for the welfare of fire
endangered communities and vulnerable households who
rely on energy for life and who are hard hit by the
shutoffs that they just use as a stand in
for taking real care. Don't allow PG&E to
just bring in new financiers and put the debt burden on
already burdened ratepayers. And now, even more burdened
ratepayers and fire survivors. Our families are still
paying for the 2011 bankruptcy on our bills,
and our households should not made to pay for another bailout.
Energy is a human right. (ring) I just echo the demands of
Reclaim Our Power that any deal must (ring)put the needs of the fire
survivors and the public first or it must be rejected (ring)
Thank you. (ring)
President Batjer: Thank you. Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: Tara Quizell, please state your organization.
Chuck Roselle: My name is Chuck Roselle and I represent myself. I
live in Oakland, California. I am requesting that the
central procurement framework being proposed in agenda
item number five be rejected in favor of central procurement
process similar to AB 3014 to propose legislation
from Assemblyman Muratsuchi. It has been stated
that the framework is unnecessary since there's no
viable alternative. In fact, AB 3014 is sponsored
by the California Community Choice Association and
it addresses the Law Judge's concerns raised over
last year's negotiated central buying authority that,
in turn, incorporated the views of community choice
in San Diego Gas & Electric. THE CPUC is aware
the ratepayers preference for local energy procurement.
Nevertheless, it has avoided taking acting to require
the IOUs to downsize their existing generation
as the CCAs have evolved, instead allowing the PCIA
to be used as a mechanism to shift costs to ratepayers.
The proposed central procurement framework continues
this avoidance. Any central generation mechanism should
directly lead to eliminating PCIA. Thank you
very much.
President Batjer: Thank you, sir. The next caller, please
Operator: Ruth with Youth and Apocalypse. You may speak.
<v President Batjer>Caller, please. Ruth.
Operator: one moment, ma'am.
Pete Wiley.
Pete Wiley: Was that Pete Wiley? Can you hear me?
Yes, this is Pete Wiley with the Reclaim Our
Power coalition. Before my time starts, I'd just like
to acknowledge there's at least 10 young people from various
organizations who have been stuck on the outside, getting
kicked off of the phone service, and not and still with
the hold music cause they've been pressing *1? So I
hope we can make accommodations for that. And including
a young woman named Imani whose grandmother died
in the power shutoff last year. So I hope that we
can hold space for that and recognize the staff putting
time and to make this public comment accessible. But
really, if you could hold on and open up the space
at the end for the folks who stuck on the line, that
be great. If my time can start now, I'd appreciate that.
I'm with Reclaim Our Power Utility Justice Campaign.
We are, you've heard many of our members today, over
75 organizations from across the state. And you've
gotten public comment, nearing a thousand for the
last meeting and this meeting of people demanding a
rejection of this plan of reorganization unless it
can actually work for fire survivors and the people
of California. I'll speak to a couple of very specific
things that you can do, that this Commission has
great power and is able to shape the plan. We want
real accountability that doesn't look like the accountability
of the past where PG&E self reports. We want accountability
to the Legislature, having somebody represented
to the Legislature year after year, so the public and
our elected officials can question them. We want in
this, whatever comes out of this deal, all of the debt
to be held whole, not with the Wall Street tricks that
are built in with the securitisation and the extra
ways to navigate around ratepayer neutrality. We want
real accountability and real accounting of where the
dollars and cents of going, and this Commission can demand
that. We want representation and meaningful, not just
token representation, of the impacted communities you've heard
on this call. Disability, folks with disability, folks impacted
by the fires. We want those in meaningful places of
decisionmaking power about the Board structure of
the utility going forward, about when, how and if to
shut off power going forward, about how to structure
a new energy system going forward, and how to make investments
to get us out of this mess, held in the hands of
Wall Street and not by the hands of the people of California.
We're asking you to reject this plan. Start over. The
Governor has been very articulate, time after time,
every day at noon, telling us how
(ring) we should stay safe from this virus.
We need this Commission to follow that leadership (ring) and
asked him, how can we stay safe in the energy system? (ring)
This deal is (ring) not it. Time to step up and--(ring)--deal.
Thank you for your time.
President Batjer: Thank you for your comments.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: From Miss Jocelyn, please
state your organization.
Jocelyn: Yeah. Hello, my name is
Jocelyn Gabrielle. I'm with East Yard Communities for
Environmental Justice down here in Los Angeles and Long
Beach. I definitely, first and foremost, want to appreciate
all the folks, you know, holding a down for their communities
against PG&E. Um, I'm specifically here to
talk about some of the charges down here, and I want
to uplift., you know, there's more that the CPUC can
do for families right now. There has been longstanding
issues that, you know, low income customer space. That
COVID-19 has only reinforced. You know, this
high usage price reduction that has happened, definitely
want to acknowledge it, but also want to say that it
needs to be taken at the time that stay-at-home orders
started, which was back in March. And I think that
is truly the impactful thing to do right now for starters.
We cannot penalize families for high usage when we
are staying home in this pandemic. You know, this is
our reality right now, so I think definitely, kind
of, highlighting that this reduction in high
usage charge would definitely be more useful
you know, if there was taken in March, not June.
Another thing. There's a huge gap in awareness of several
utility financial resource programs that can help families
right now.
Now, more than ever, we should be reassuring families
that there would be protections in place from utility
companies, but that there are also programs that can
help reduce the debt that's being accumulated from these
continuous charges. I want to urge you to be proactive
in developing programs for debt forgiveness and economic
recovery for vulnerable families. And, I mean, I'm
talking about families who don't have access to reliable
payment systems, actually, to this information, and so
on. And so, I want to bring these issues to light. But
I truly hope that there's action that follows these
needs. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you. Operator, the next caller,
please.
Operator: Comes from Jada. Please, give you a last name and your
organization, please.
Jada: Yes. Hi. My name is Jada Dogum,
I'm with the Local Clean Energy Alliance. I think
the Commission should reject the PG&E reorganization
plan. This pandemic proves that business as usual hurts
most of us while benefiting only a small group of
people. This Commission has the power to change business
as usual and hold PG&E accountable for its bad
decisions. However, this deal with PG&E doesn't
provide justice tp wildfire survivors or to ratepayers.
It needs major changes. First of all, you need to make
sure to protect ratepayers. We don't want to keep bearing
the risk and costs and pay for the failures of PG&E
again and again. Second wildfire survivors need justice
as well, but not in the form of unstable PG&E
stock tied up in a trust that wildfire survivors
have no control over. Wildfire survivors should be
compensated immediately. Finally, Local Clean Energy
Alliance has been working on democratizing energy for
many years. PG&E has failed us many times. I think
California deserve a better energy system. A system
based on decentralized and clean energy. A system that
representative of diverse sectors including disadvantaged
communities and California workers on the table as
Board Members, not Wall Street predators. I support
Reclaim Our Power Utility Justice Campaign's demands.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you.
The next caller, please. Operator.
Operator: Yes, it comes from
Issa Miss. You may speak your last name and your
organization, please.
Elisa: Hi, this is Elise Macquero, I'm with
East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice. A member
here in Los Angeles, and I want to acknowledge the voices
of the youth, who, (unclear) right now about PG&E,
please listen to them, and as a young person myself,
I, you know, want to reiterate the importance of addressing
climate change and the importance of holding PG&E
accountable. But right now I'm calling on item
26, and I want to take this opportunity to comment
on this important issue because as a low income person,
I appreciate the Commission's initiative to lower the
high use charge. And unfortunately, I think that the
charges coming too late in June and at this time
should be retroactively applied since the stay at home
order was set in place. Low income people don't have
the ability to pay an extra charge when people have
lost their jobs and when income should be spent on
more, more essential things, like food. I don't think
that the option, that we don't have an option but to use
electricity when we're at home 24-7, and with the rising
temperatures coming in May, people have no option
but to use air conditioners and fans to stay safe.
So please make sure that the high use charge gets
applied to March because low income people don't have
the income to to make this change, I mean, to
pay for it.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you very much.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Operator: President
Batjer, there are no more speakers on the comment
telephone line. I'm concerned about the people
that mister, one of our speakers a few minutes ago mentioned
that there were several folks, he said ten, I think.
that were waiting to get onto the line to call in.
Is there a possibility that for some reason, they couldn't
call in? Robert, are you still on the line with us?
Robert: Yes. The President Batjer. This is Robert Stanford.
President Batjer: Do you know if there are other people that are
waiting? Is there any way for us to know that?
I'm not sure why they couldn't get on the line.
They wanted to speak.
Robert: I am checking on that President
Batjer. Give me one minute.
President Batjer: Okay. Thank you, Robert
Commissioner Randolph: President Batjer, this is Commissioner Randolph. I
just wanted to note that I lost my video because my
computer decided to restart itself. But I'm
still here on audio, and hopefully, I'll be back online
in a moment.
President Batjer: Yes, I do. See that we lost you. Okay.
Great. Thank you for thank you for notifying us.
We're just doing some checking to make sure that indeed
everyone that wanted to speak on the phone lines
has had an opportunity to do so.
Operator: Ma'am--
President Batjer: So what we'll--
While we're waiting, I think we should go to the
email. Those people that have written in. I will
ask Public Advisor Brown if we have any email.
Allison Brown: Yes, President Batjer. This is Allison Brown. Can you
hear me alright?
President Batjer: Yes, I can hear you fine. Thank
you, Alison.
Allison Brown: Perfect. We have a two
comments that we have--(audio distortion)
President Batjer: Alison, you're fading out now, unfortunately.
Allison Brown: Okay
let me, I will readjust. Alright. The first
comment is from Jim Stewart, Ph. D. It reads, I am opposed
to item number four of the CPUC's May 7th agenda. This approves
PG&E's advice letter describing proposed allocations
of carbon-free energy--(noise)--hydro and nuclear to see CCAs
that ask for it. This reminds us all that Diablo
Canyon should be shut down immediately to save
ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars per year, plus
saving billions of fish killed by the hot water. In
addition, the CPUC should reject any agreement with
PG&E that does not require immediate installation,
this year, of arc interrupters throughout fire prone
areas to eliminate any downed wires starting fires
as SDG&E have done. Also, all bare wires need
to be replaced with steel core triple-insulated wires
within five years. These requirements need to be part
of the agreement with PG&E to protect us from more
wildfires.
And the second comment is regarding Item 27. It reads,
Dear Commissioners, I wanted to comment on the proposed
rule making setting forth the schedule and plans for carrying
out the next phase of the integrated resource planning
process. I'd first like to point out that the proposed
rulemaking fails to take account of the fact that we
are now living at an extraordinarily different and
challenging time from the world that we've come to
see as normal. The new abnormal is a shattered economy,
massive unemployment, lost state and local revenue,
and tremendous uncertainty. The Commission's decision
to delay procurement and new investment, which are needed
to meet both reliability, climate and clean energy
goals, could have the effect of slowing California's
economic recovery. Second, while the proposed
rulemaking includes the provision of coordinating with
the California Energy Commission, which is important
both because of the CEC's role in planning for
SB100, as well is reviewing the IRPs of publicly
owned utilities, we believe the Commission, and
especially its staff, could learn a great deal from the
different methodologies and approaches being used by
innovative publicly-owned utilities such as the Los
Angeles Department of Water and Power, which along
with its consultant, the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, is taking a more ambitious and comprehensive
approach to meet climate, clean energy, and reliability
needs in the assumptions and analytical tools upon
which the Commission, its staff, and its private consultants
are relying. Third, we would like to suggest that, before
embarking on another IRP cycle, that the Commission
should hold on en banc hearing to enable LSEs,
interested parties and other agencies with responsibilities
for meeting statutory climate and clean energy goals
to share directly with the Commission their observations,
experience, and suggestions for making the next iteration
of the IRP more successful and likely to be implemented,
so that California gets back on track in meeting GHG
reduction and clean energy targets, including near
term procurement of critically important resources,
such as long duration storage and offshore wind.
Thank you for listening. Signed B. John White, Executive Director
of the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technology.
And that concludes the comments that we received online.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Advisor Brown. Can we, have
we learned if there's anybody else on the
line that's waiting to get in to the public comment
telephone line?
Operator: There has been one. Eli Gonzales, please state your
organizations.
Elliot: Hi. My name is Elliot. I'm with Stop Fracking Long
Beach. Can you all hear me?
President Batjer: Yes, we can.
Elliot: Oh, great.
I just wanted to say I appreciated hearing everybody's
comment, especially of the youth, you know, fighting
for their future, you know, and really, it's nothing
less. I am a low income ratepayer here in Long
Beach. And, Edison, actually, I don't know
if you guys know this, but you need to know this.
Edision will check your credit periodically. And if you're
a low income person, they will ask for an additional
deposit, which you can only get back by paying a year
of no late payments to get your deposit refunded to
you once you once you leave your unit. So we just
got a notice asking for an additional deposit. So we
paid our deposit and, you know, when we set up our
electricity, and now, they want an additional deposit
because our credit has gone has gone down because,
you know, we're struggling. Poor people are struggling,
and we have been for years now. So I just wanted to
share that with you because I'm hearing a lot of predatory
behavior from Pacific Gas and Electric, and a lot of
other low income ratepayers are saying that they need
assistance. And Edison will simply give you some
information about their programs. Yet they have predatory
practices that they are enacting on low income consumers.
And I don't know if any of you all are low income
consumers, so you may not be getting these type of
predatory behaviors. So I did want to put that on
your radar, that it is not appropriate to ask for an
additional deposit. They don't need it and on, and
that they're targeting poor people during a moment
of crisis. So I wanted to share that with you, as well
as express my solidarity with all of the young people
who are fighting for their future. Thank you.
<v President Batjer>Thank you. If there's
anybody that is trying, that's on the phone who
wants to make a comment, you need to press *1.
Operator, are there any other callers?
Operato? Or Robert, ff you're on, are there any other
callers?
Operator: Hello, ma'am.
President Batjer: Yes
Operator: Yes, there is a caller on here, but
he's on mute. I'm calling out to him and they're not
speaking back, so I don't know who to open the line up
for.
President Batjer: Okay, if you can hear us, please unmute your phone.
Operator: I'll call back out to you
Okay. We're going to have to,
if there are no more callers or anyone waiting on
the line that has not pressed *1, we're going to
need to conclude Public Comment period.
Operator?
Operator: Yes? Stan Greshner.
President Batjer: Is that the person you were referring to earlier?
Operator: Yes ma'am.
Go forward.
Stan Greshner: Hello? Can you hear me?
Yeah. I just wanted to let you know. I called in
several times, including before 10 o'clock and have been
on hold. So there might be others who are got kicked
off as well. You know, we thought we were missing Public
Comment, so thank you for opening it back.
President Batjer: Thank you. We're trying
to get them. I'm sorry that there's been that difficulty
Stan Greshner: Yeah. Thank you. Good morning, Commissioners. It's
good to be with you all this morning. I was Stan Greshner,
with Good Alternatives. I also served as chair of
the CPUC Disadvantaged Community Advisory Group, or DCAG,
and I'm here today representing the DCAG to speak
specifically on the Environmental and Social Justice
Action Plan that you'll be discussing later today.
First, I want to thank Commissioners Guzman Aceves
and Rechtschaffen for their teams and Commission staff
who collaborated with the DCAG to develop
this ESJ plan last year, and again, thank all the Commissioners
for adopting the plan. Many of the recommendations
put forward by the DCAG were incorporated into the
Environmental Social Justice Action Plan, including
adopting many of the equity principles that the
DCAG outlined in its own equity framework. The ESJ
plan was a great initial step, an initial blueprint
that created a good framework to identify the systemic
issues within the PUC that have created barriers for
equitable participation and equitable programming within
the CPUC and the utilities. But the DCAG also
recognized it as being just that first step, and we've
discussed in subsequent conversations that the plan
cannot be just a static document or simple
guide. But it has to be activated across the entire
PUC with intention to change culture and structures
and needs ongoing leadership from all of
you, from the Commissioners, and within all the
departments, within the ALJS and all staff,
to address the structural barriers that unintentionally
limit the voices at the table in many of these important
conversations. We know processes need to change to
open the dialogue to include more diverse perspectives.
And that relying on precedent to justify decisions or
how we move forward can no longer be held as sacrosanct.
It is precedent that we need to move beyond, and that
has created many of the legacy equity challenges we
need to address. It's a great (ring) straight undertaking, and we're
thrilled that the PUC has taking (ring) proactive steps to accept
this challenge. A few more seconds. (ring) And there's Commissions--(ring)--
The Commission should also not stop at its own doors
to demand changed. The CPUC is here to regulate the utilities,
and the utilities themselves must incorporate the ESJ
action plan into their own process and changes.
And we've seen many instances where the program design or
procurement practices don't align with strong equity
requirements or considerations--
President Batjer: I think, sir, excuse me, you're
going to need to conclude.
Stan Greshner: I will conclude. And as we
discussed as CPUC staff, just couple of weeks ago, the
DCAG will continue working closely with all of you
to support the integration of the ESJ plan and the
principles throughout the Commission. The DCAG members are here
as your advisors and you should feel confident reaching
out to share ideas and perspectives and questions with
us. We all stand ready to support this effort. So thank
you for your ongoing leadership on this. On this effort.
President Batjer: Thank you. Operator, I understand there are four people
that are in the queue to speak? Is that--
Operator: That's correct.
President Batjer: Okay.
So, let's take those four. And then we'll
need to bring the public comment period
to a close.
Operator: Yes, ma'am. Michael LaGary, please state
your organization?
Aguirre: Yes. Aguirre and Severson.
President Batjer: Go ahead, Mr Aguirre.
Aguirre: Thank you very much. First of all
I want to thank you very much for allowing public comment.
Some of our state agencies and local agencies are
not allowing oral comment. And so I want to thank you
for that. Number two. After having engaged in a lot
of warfare with CPC over the last several years, I
want to say on the record that I have grown to respect
the staff of the CPUC and many of the folks that
are the lawyers that present, that represent the CPUC.
But there's one observation that I would ask you to
consider. And that is the big picture of why has the
CPUC not been successful? What is the reason
that we have PG&E in bankruptcy, Southern California
Edison in trouble? What's behind all that? And I would
offer up this one suggestion. When the CPUC acts like
the CPUC, when the CPUC staff, it's Commissioners, it's
attorneys, are allowed to carry out their responsibilities
as those responsibilities were anticipated and provided
for in the State Constitution and in the development
and the history of administrative decisions and legal
decisions. They do well, and they can do well when
they obey the rules, when they make their decisions
based on records that have developed before the ALJs
when they allow their ALJ's to really exercise
independent judgment, they are successful and they
will be successful. Where the PUC has gotten in trouble
is it has allowed the utilities to go to the Legislature
to go to the Governor's office, to work their lobbyists
through those two avenues, and then to put pressure
on the CPUC not to meet their responsibilities. And
that's how come we have PG&E and the trouble
that they're in and starting the fires. You know, we
have a convicted felon, not just a convicted felon
with regard to San Bruno, but now they are a convicted
felon with regard to 84 criminal homicides in
the Camp Fire. Please, speak to your consciences. Please
be true to the CPUC and not allow yourselves to be
politicized through the Governor's office and
through the Legislature. Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you.
Operator, the next caller, please.
Laura Rosenberg: Hello? This is Laura Rosenberg of Fresno's Against
Fracking. Diablo Canyon Nuclear plants is a
bad investment. While the Chair of the Nuclear Commission
under Obama believed that nuclear power was dangerous
and there's an increased risk of leakage through the
earthquakes, especially hydraulic fracturing is will
increase the rate of earthquakes, and that's occurring
starting to occur right now. And also where is the
nuclear waste disposed of? That's the question, because
it might set in an EJ community, and it's hard to
dispose of. And Toxic algal blooms are linked to its hot
water coming out of the plant and
And then also fire's an issue. That any agreement
PG&E needs arc interrupters and replacing bad wires
The fires result in more death from benzene exposure
from melted plastic.
Thanks.
Operator: Miss Elizabeth with Youth and Apocalypse.
Lizbeth: Can you hear me? I'm Elizabeth
with Youth versus Apocalypse. I'm a high school student
in Richmond, California and I'm calling, and I
want to talk about the plan to restructure PG&E.
I believe that this deal is a bad deal, that the corporate
ownership based power, the control of energy should
be in the hands of the community. With PG&E
in control, their decision are made with making profits
in mind rather than serving the community. The decisions
they make about wildfire safety and power shutoffs
negatively impact us, and they should be held
criminally liable for the damage they continue
to cause. We need the community
sorry, we need to stop because the community and those
being impacted are the ones to have to take the consequences
of PG&E's mistakes. Executives need to pay and give back. Give
us what we need, which is to build a livable future
We're reclaiming our power because we need and deserve
to own our own system and give different and better.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you.
Any other callers, operator?
Next caller, Miss Imani
from, you may ask your question.
President Batjer: Please go ahead. Hi.
Go ahead.
Imani: My name is Imani and I live in
Oakland. I worked with Youth versus Apocalypse. We
deserve a different PG&E because they never executed
all their job requirements and are responsible for almost
100 deaths including my grandmother's. In 2019, PG&E were
turning off power in the Albany area, which is where
my grandma was living at the time. She was using a
machine to remove the fluid in her lungs. And when PG&E
cut the power,
they killed her.
It was the only thing keeping her alive because she
also had cancer. More people shouldn't
have to go through this. Please don't let them. Please
don't let this happen to anyone else. Thank you for
your time.
President Batjer: Thank you. And I'm sorry if you had to wait
on the line. Thank you very much.
Imani: It's okay. Thank
you so much.
President Batjer: Operator, I think we have one more caller?
Operator: President Batjer, there are no more speakers on the
public comment telephone line.
President Batjer: Okay, thank you very
much. We have read the emails that came in prior to
10 AM this morning. So, in that there are
no more callers on the line, the public comment
period is now closed.
<v Commissioner Rechtschaffen>President Batjer.
President Batjer: Yes.
<v Commissioner Rechtschaffen>This is Commissioner
Rechtschaffen. I just wanted to comment on the caller
who raised the concern about Edison's requirement to
impose an additional deposit. And I just want, I
don't know if he's still on the line, but I wanted
to assure him that we will follow up about that. I
don't know if that's covered by our existing suite
of consumer protections that we've enacted or not,
but in any case, we will follow up to find out what
it is doing and if it's appropriate.
President Batjer: And he also mentioned
that the other two IOUs may also have a similar
situation. So I would suggest that we look into all
three of the major IOUs for the same thing. Thank
you Commissioner Rechtschaffen, I had taken note of that
as well. There any other comments from the Commissioners
about the public comment period?
Okay, thank you.
The public comment period is now closed.
Thank you, Operator. Item five on the May 7th meeting
agenda was subject to a rate-setting deliberative meeting
for Virtuous and RGM and a hold to the May 28th
voting meeting has been requested and indeed
granted. As a result, this item will be subject to
a default ex parte quiet period, pursuant to Public
Utility Section 1701.3h6. This item may be subject
to additional quiet time if the
Commission chooses to extend the default quiet time.
The default quiet time is as follows. No oral or written
ex parte communication will be allowed from May 25,
2022, through the end of the May 28, 2020, Voting Meeting. If
the Commission establishes additional
quiet time for this item, oral and written ex parte
communications will be restricted during that additional
quiet time. If this item is held again. Excuse me. The
Commission will continue to have the ability to establish
further ex parte quiet period.
Moving on the agenda. These are the following changes
to today's agenda.
Item number two will be held until the 5-28-20 Commission
meeting. Item number five will be held to the 5-28-20
Commission meeting. Item number eight will be held
to the 5-28-20 Commission meeting. Item 12 will be
held until the 5-28-20 Commission meeting. Item 16
will be held to the 5-28-20 Commission meeting and
item 33 will be held until the 5-28-20 Commission meeting.
These are, we will now take, excuse me, we will now take
up the consent items. Is there an, is there a motion?
Commissioner Randolph: So moved.
President Batjer: Is there a second?
Commissioner Shiroma: I'll second the motion.
President Batjer: Thank you. It's been moved
and seconded. Will the agenda clerk please call the
roll.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Randolph.
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: President Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. Thank you. The consent agenda items have
been passed unanimously. Commissioner Shiroma
would like to make remarks on item 26. And Commissioner
Guzman Aceves would like to make remarks on Item
19 and 23. And I will be making a remark on Item
23. Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Yes, Thank you, President Batjer.
I would like to highlight the decision we just
voted out on Consent Item 26. We had several public
commenters on this item which temporarily reduces
the high usage charge for Pacific Gas and Electric,
Southern California Edision, and San Diego Gas
and Electric residental customers during the tendency of
the COVID crisis. The high usage charge or commonly referred
to as the HUC, is (audio cuts) that applies to
residential customers on non time of use rates that use
more than 400% of the baseline energy usage for their
area. Now, I'm the assigned Commissioner on a proceeding
1909014 where, since last year, we have been going through
the process of evaluating this particular charge. However,
data collected by Commission, revealed that increases
in residential extra usage as result of the stay at
home order will likely result in far more Californians,
potentially twice as many, paying the Huc than historically
observed or intended. So toward mitigating the electricity
bills of customers experiencing the HUC due to the
mandatory stay at home order. This decision does reduce
it from 75% of the Tier 2 which is the Tier
level, to 25%, from 75% to 25%. And this production does
go into effect starting June 1st, and will remain
in effect until the either the latter of October 31st
or the termination of the Governor's stay at home order
or similar order. Now, again, we have the main proceeding
where we're looking at the long-term effect
of this particular rate. But meanwhile, this is the
latest piece and the Commissioner's coordinated effort
to ensure residential bills remain manageable during
this time of crisis. And as we heard from a number of commenters
they are encouraging us to do as much as we can, we certainly
are, and we have our website CPUC.CA.GOV
There is a link there for all of the
COVID related activities of the Commission and one of
the comments, several commenters talked about having
wanted to have new rate be retroactive.
Now, we previously voted out the climate credit, the
climate credit provides for some rate relief in the April
bill. Also, we voted out in the climate credit moving
to also cover May and June. And so we are, we're
hopeful that those efforts will provide for some mitigation
as the HUC does then kick in. Now,
and people will see on the website that there
has been no disconnection, no penalties, what
have you, and people can check it out now. I would like
to extend my sincerest thanks to Judge Patrick
Doherty. Massoud Fuda in the Energy division,
and my Energy Advisor, Mary Claire Brown and the rest
of the team who worked on this decision really for
their very speedy work to get this relief measure
in place in time to make a difference on customer bills.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Commissioner Shiroma. Commissioner
Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Thank you, President Batjer. I wanted to speak
on a couple of the telecommunication related items that we
voted it out and highlight
a little bit of what they do and how they relate to
the moment. The first item is related to Item 19, which was a
request for supplemental funding of $10.8 million, which is,
I recongize, a large amount for the Climate River Rural Broadband
Initiative. This project would bring affordable broadband to a service area
where there's a large amount of unserved population. The project would
serve the Karook tribe, the Eurok tribe, and some of the non tribal
affiliated neighbors. We all recently
received a letter from the group Chairman
Russell Atterbury, very eloquently stated,
that the COIVD 19 pandemic proves
that broadband access is a necessity for all people, no matter where they
live. And the hardship caused by the pandemic are obviously magnified in poor
communities because the lack in connectivity.
Millions of Californians lack this
essential safety net today for two primary
reasons, they cannot afford it or does not exist.
And in this project, we
have both of these factors.
We at the Commission, as you stated earlier, President
Batjer, and then Commissioner Shiroma just stated,
<v Commissioner Guzman Aceves>have been
working diligently, and I also want to thank
all of our staff for the work that they continue to
do. As a basic part of what we do is figuring
out in this moment what the new approaches are that
we need to take. We need more participants, particularly
in the Arena project. You need to empower local governments,
including tribes, to lead and to build this infrastructure
for the community. And again, I do want to recognize
that this will not beat a low cost proposition, especially
if we want to invest in sustainable communication investments
such a fiber or cable This supplemental funding can
provide the group the ability to build out 22 miles
of middle mile infrastructure. This is an additional
22 miles to the 82 miles that are already part of
this project. They will also cover some additional things
like environmental review and additional labor. And
as Commissioner Rechtschaffen and Commissioner Randolph
and myself have learned in our different visits to
the area, the territory that discovers is so vast and
the terrain is very rough. Densely forested and has
a lower density of population of rural community. So
these projects are not easy. I just want to reiterate
that while I am very excited for this project moving forward,
we need additional solutions to make projects like
this successful. It took well over a year to negotiate
attaching the fiber to the PG&E lines. It took even
longer than that to get a point of contact with AT&T
for interconnectivity. And so this is the opportunity
here with COVID to figure out what are the most streamlined
ways to facilitate projects like this that have taken
nearly a decade to come to fruition. And obviously, this
is approving the fudning It's not actually for that service today.
I also wanna reiterate all the CSF team that
has been working on this, there have been,
you know, different classes, if you will, (mumble)
work on, those people have now moved on. So
I won't be able to name everybody, but just great.
We want to thank the leadership of that team, and I'll
move onto the next examples that the CSF team has taken
on. This item, item 23, is an item related to
really the calm leadership of the Governor and
the Superintendent of Public Education of the Department
Education, Superintendent Tony Sermon, and, as you know,
our children are going to school at home. And I personally
know that in my son's class, there are still children
missing in participation, and they have been distance
learning for over eight weeks now. They started very early.
And some schools are just beginning. This resolution
is allocating $5 million of the California Advance
Service Fund Adoption Funding, and it's going to be allocating
it to the Department of Education to work with schools
who are in dire need of these devices to connect at
home. There's other strategies that obviously the
Department of Education and ourselves have also worked
on the service extension at home. This particular
resolution is focused on the technology they need to
utilize that service.
Just want to share a couple memories that
we just learned from Department of Education and the
latest updating of their survey. They reported that they
have more than 460,000 devices of need from their schools
in the school district, and this funding will cover
approximately 20,000 devices. So we've been working
with them, as they have been cobbling together different
pieces of funding and again to the leadership of first
partner in particular in getting these different communication
corporations to provide, pending the latest
we learned is that Ryan Seacrest donated additional
devices in Los Angeles. So the Department of Education
has really just been doing a tremendous amount of coordination
of these types of pieces of this puzzle.
Our funding will be prioritized with smaller medium
districts, primarily in rural areas of high poverty
and low broadband adoption. We look forward to continuing
to work. I want to thank Commissioner Shiroma, my buddy
on the Telco task force to really help figure out different
strategies, not just this one, to continue to be as
responsive as we can be. But most of all, I did
want to reflect on both of these programs, in particular
with this adoption program, because it has so much
to do with the lack of affordable access for Californians
to come home to be able to connect for school, for work.
And it's just simply not enough. This approach
that we're taking, particularly, on the bar exam
side, is really highlighting how many holes exist in the safety net
for this utility. I really look forward to continue
to work with the Governor's office and the Legislature
to make all the necessary changes to regulatory structure
in this industry and how we're providing and ultimately
take this as an opportunity to get to a place where
broadband will be considered a basic utility and having
all the measures to accomplish that for California.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Commissioner Guzman Aceves.
I would like to add my voice to that of yours
in saying how important this effort, Item 23,
the resolution, how important the effort was and I really
want to thank both you, Commissioner Guzman Aceves
and Commissioner Shiroma. You worked very hard with
the Governor's office to make this happen. And it was
along with a great team which include the communications
division director Rob Osborne, the CAFF team of Selena
Huang and James Tang, and then the CTF team of Eric Van
Lunke and Adam Clark and Stacy Castro from the Legal
Division. They all worked so hard and I would add my
advisor Michael Mulaney to that list. So thank you.
This is a very important effort that will aid people
that are in great need. Children that are in great need
during this this period. And thank you, too, for underscoring
the gaps that are still existing in the fabric of communications
that people so much are in such need of. So thank
you for your comments, and I appreciate it very much.
Are there any other comments on the consent items?
Consent agenda? Okay. Thank you again. We will now
take up the regular agenda items.
Item number 34 is Commissioner Rechtschaffen's item.
Would you like to speak to item 34?
<v Commissioner Rechtschaffen>Yes, thank you
very much, President Batjer.
This decision brings to an end the Commission's enforcement
action against PG&E stemming from its role in
the 2017 and 2018 Northern California fires. A
grim chapter in PG&E history that had devastating consequences.
Our investigation found that PG&E's misconduct caused
15 of the wildfires resulting in unprecedented damage.
Over 100 people killed, 25,000 structures destroyed,
hundreds of thousands of acres burned, and the destruction
of an entire community in Paradise. The wildfires,
as we know, also led PG&E to declare bankruptcy, which
is an extraordinarily disruptive process for a
company that provides essential utility services to millions
of residents.
Of course, for the victims of the fires, the damage
the pain, the trauma is ongoing.
In this case, prior to evidentiary hearing, PG&E
reached a settlement with two parties. The Advocacy
section of our Safety and Enforcement division and
the Coalition of California Utility Employees. The
settlement provided for $1.625 billion in disallowed
costs, shareholder cost, there are costs that shareholders would bare
that otherwise PG&E would seek to recover from
customers and $50 million in various system enhancements.
The total penalty amount was $1.675 billion.
When the Commission approved a settlement, we look
to see if it's reasonable in light of the whole record,
consistent with the law, and in the public interest. Those
are the findings we need to make to approve a settlement.
At the end of February, ALJ Judge Park issued
a presiding officers decisions reviewing the settlement
The decision is known as a POD. And the POD modified
the settlement in several important ways, which were
entirely appropriate. First, it added an additional
$64 million in system enhancements. These will ensure
that PG&E can fully implement the findings of the
various root cause analysis relating to the wildfires
that the settlement mandates that it undertake. Second,
the settlement added an additional $198 million in
disallowed costs. Additional costs that shareholders
would have to bear. This is justified because of the
original 1.625 billion of disallowed cost in the settlement,
$900 million related to wildfire-related costs that PG&E
may very well not have been entitled to recover from
ratepayers in the first place.
Third, the POD imposed a $200 million fine that was
payable to the General Fund. Fine is clearly appropriate
here, given the unprecedented scale and the scope of
harm from the wildfires, that PG&E caused and
because fines convey unique societal of program.
And finally, the POD stipulated that tax benefits that
PG&E will realize from the expenditures it is
required to undertake by the settlement, will go to
ratepayers, not shareholders, to the extent allowed
by IRS rules and this, these benefits will be realized
in future years, when the benefits are taken by PG&E.
PG&E appeal Judge Park's POD. I just want to stop
and comment on the appeal.
Given PG&E's strongly professed recognition of the
need to dramatically transform its culture, its approach
to safety, and its professed commitment to working collaboratively
in the future with its regulators, the stridency of
PG&E's appeal was highly unfortunate and indeed deeply
disappointing. I won't go line by line, but I want
to highlight two things in particular. One is that PG&E
vigorously disputed its potential liability from the
fires.
These protests were particularly disingenuous given
that, among other things, PG&E was at the same time
pleading guilty 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter
in connection with the Camp Fire.
This is conduct that the Buchanan DA likened to, quote,
reckless arson.
Second, PG&E relentlessly attacked ALJ Park for
revising the settlement, and hyperbolically argued that
modifying the settlement threatened to undermine the Commission's
regulatory compact with utilities.
In fact, the settlement that was reached only included
a subset of the parties in the proceeding and was vigorously
contested by the others. And in these circumstances
the Commission does not accord any special deference
to the settlement, but exercises its independent judgment
to ensure that the settlement is in the interest of
the public and all parties. And this type of independent
Commission review is especially important in the case
of this magnitude and public consequence.
Havin said that, the Commission settlement rules
do require that settling parties approve any proposed
modification to a settlement, and this is appropriate
to ensure that the settling parties did not have conditions
imposed on them without their agreement. PG&E in its
appeal specified two issues that it said were unacceptable
to the company. Number one, it requested that the $200
million fine be paid out of the trust established in
the bankruptcy case to pay wildfire victims and that
it not be paid out of any other source from the company.
And second,
PG&E opposed the modification to pass all tax savings
associated with the expenditures required by the
settlement on to ratepayers, alleging that the return
of tax benefits on capital expenditures to ratepayers
would violate IRS rules.
In response to this appeal and subsequent filings by
PG&E, I initiated two processes. One, a request
for review, and then the second, a decision different.
These are different procedural devices the Commission
can employ in cases like this, and in particular, I recommended
making two changes to Judge Park's POD. First, with respect
to the $200 million fine, I rejected PG&E's proposal
to pay the fine out of the victims trust because it
would be entirely inappropriate to pit the payment of
fines to the PUC against the claims of the wildfire
victims. At the same time, however,
PG&E raised a credible threat that paying fines
from sources other than the victim's trust could jeopardize
the funding commitments that it had received and that
it needs to exit bankruptcy. So, given the unique circumstances
of the bankruptcy, PG&E's need to exit bankruptcy by June
30th, wildfire victims to receive the benefits of the
trust, assuming it's approved by the federal bankruptcy
process, but also the need for PG&E to exit
bankruptcy by June 30th in order to gain access to
the State Wildfire Liability Fund, I recommended that
the payment of the fine be permanently suspended.
Second, I clarified that consistent with IRS rules,
the tax benefits from the settlement that passed through
to ratepayers will be limited operational expenses
only, and that the tax benefits from capital expenditures
will go to PG&E's shareholders. Again, that's consistent
with the IRS rules. Although the tax, the benefits
that will go to ratepayers are uncertain, PG&E
estimated that they could be as much as $425 million.
After initially opposing part of my recommendation,
PG&E ultimately accepted all of them and the modifications,
as did the other settling parties. So as a result,
the decision before us today consists of the following:
a record penalty of $1.937 billion. This is money
that shareholders will pay, and that includes 1.823
billion in disallowances for wildfire related expenditures,
$114 million in system enhancement initiatives and
corrective actions to further protect public safety, and
a $200 million fine that is permanently suspeneded.
I recognize that a permanent suspension of the
fine is deeply unsatisfying to many. Several interveners
strongly opposed this provision. I share this frustration.
I think it's important to keep in mind, however, that
this penalty action is only one of many aggressive
steps that the Commission's taking to hold PG&E
accountable for its actions and to help prevent future
misconduct. I also want to emphasize that it is an
extremely rare set of circumstances that justify departure
from our normal penalty rules as we've done here.
Finally, the decision includes the requirement that
PG&E's customers benefit from the tax savings from
operational expenses and that shareholders do not.
That's the decision. I want to express my deep appreciation
for the outstanding work of our safety and enforcement
division here, both in investigating the fires, developing
extensive reports of violations, and working extremely
diligently to negotiate a settlement that provided
for meaningful benefits, meaningful penalties, and public
benefits. I think with the modifications as proposed and
hopefully approved today, the settlement is even stronger
and will do more to hold PG&E accountable for its failure to
make safety a top priority.
Finally, I want to express thanks for those who worked
on this case. Judge Park for really outstanding
work from start to finish, our super sharp legal mind
fast, thorough, clear and decisive writing, maintaining a
calm demeanor throughout. I want to thank the legal
division for its excellent analysis. My advisor Oberg and Sean
Simon for their extremely hard work. My Bagley-Keene
partner, President Batjer. And finally, I want to
give out a special shout out of appreciation to Margie
Lascano in the legal division, who helped process
my decision different. And today's decision as
well, stepping up to the plate to really help out.
So with that, I will close and I ask for your support
on this decision.
President Batjer: Thank you so much, Commissioner
Rechtschaffen. I want to add, jump ahead of my fellow Commissioners
for a second because we were Bagley-Keene partners on
this very important decision, and I want to thank you
and your staff. It was quite extraordinary. And I'm
absolutely touched in this week that we're honoring
public service, you demonstrated the highest and most
honorable of public service on this decision. It was
my honor to participate. But more importantly
watch your tenacious, your quick mind, your thoroughness,
and your determination to get this right. And I just
want to thank you so very much Commissioner Rechtschaffen
and your staff.
Thank you very much, President Batjer.
President Batjer: Are there any
other comments on item 34?
Okay, I will then turn, oh, yes, Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Thank you so much. I'm in support of Item
34. I do thank a Commission Rechtschaffen as you very
eloquently described President Batjer, the intensive
month of work. Also Judge Park on her diligent review
of the settlement, the proposed modifications, and
of course, to the Safety and Enforcement division in their role
in bringing this forward. And I again to reiterate
what was said, I really appreciate that PG&E will not
be recovering over $1.8 billion in this case from
the customers, from ratepayers.
I think, appropriately, the operating expense tax
benefits going to the customers and the ratepayers is
excellent. And finally, we really appreciate the inclusion
of the clause which is intended to identify non-diesel
generators capable of meeting of range of use cases
including plant outages and temporary microwave in
the future as a part of this as well. All right
Thank you.
President Batjer: Any other comment? Thank you, Comissioner Shiroma.
Any other comments on Item Number 34? Okay, seeing
none. Will the agenda clerk please call the roll?
Agenda Clerk: For item number 34. Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: President Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. The vote for item
number 34 is unanimous. Thank you all turning now to
item number 35 which is also Commissioner
Rechtschaffen's item.
<v Commissioner Rechtschaffen>Item 35
is an extension, an order extending time.
It concerns a complaint by Thunder Home, Thunderbird
Mobile Home Park against PG&E and its implementation
of the Mobile Home Park Utility Upgrade Program. Thunderbird
alleges that PG&E faield to consult with the park
on the specific location of new infrastructure and
that the placement of some infrastructure has diminished
the use and value of individual mobile home spaces and
the mobile home park overall. It's encountered some
delays due to the PG&E bankruptcy. However, I'm happy
to report that the parties reached a settlement through
our alternative dispute resolution process, and the
agreement has been submitted to the Bankruptcy Court
for review and approval. Upon approval by the Bankruptcy
Court, the parties will file a motion here to dismiss
the underlying complaint. Because of these circumstances,
today's decision extends the statutory deadline to November
2020. I ask for your support.
President Batjer: Thank you. Are there
any comments on item 35? Okay, seeing none, will the
agenda clerk, please call the roll?
Agenda Clerk: For Item 35, Commissioner
Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: President Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. The vote is unanimous. Thank you. Moving to Item
36, Commission Shiroma.
Commissioner Shiroma: Yes, Thank you. Present Batjer.
This proceeding, A1805011 involves the
proposed purchase of the city of Paris's municipal
water system by Liberty Utilities, Apple Valley Ranch
Water and Park Water Corporation. I'm asking for your
support to extend the deadline for completion of this
ratesetting proceeding from May 9 to October 22,
2020. The proposed decision for this application
was issued last month on April 22nd for comments. We
considered it our May 28 meeting. We anticipate reviewing
the comments that may come in and have already been
coming in on this PD and resolving it in a timely
manner. However, I am asking for the full extension
to October 22nd to allow for sufficient time for
the comments and resolving issues which which may arrive
from those comments. I do ask your aye vote for the extension.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you, Commissioner Shiroma Any comments
on item 36? Okay, seeing none, will the agenda clerk
please call the roll.
Agenda Clerk: For item 36, Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Yes.
Agenda Clerk: President Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. The vote is unanimous for item 37. Moving on to Item
38. Excuse me. That was 30. I got ahead of myself.
That was item 36, a unanimous
vote. Now, we're moving on to Item 37, which is Commissioner
Guzman Aceves.
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Thank you, President Batjer. This item
has to do with the another extensions of statutory
deadline (audio garbles)
And, fortunately, we were able to move some of
the more urgent needs into Commissioner Shiroma's
microgrid proceeding, which obviously we will be taking
up soon. So I'm asking for an extension from the current
deadline of May 17 of this year to May 17
of next year for two main reasons. There are currently
a series of working groups that are continuing to work
on a variety of issues, working group two and three
are looking at issues related to timeliness, billing
issues, third party construction. And hopefully
on those issues, we can issue something later in the year,
and also in working group four, that one just began this February,
and are also dealing with a set complicated issues around
streamlining as well as energy buildings and energy
storage in the connection, among other things. So
with that, I ask for your support in extending to May of
next year.
President Batjer: Okay. Thank you. Are are there any questions
on item 37? Okay, seeing none, will the agenda clerk
please call the roll.
Commissioner Shiroma: For item 37, Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Yes.
Agenda Clerk: President Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. The
vote for item 37 is unanimous. We'll move now onto
item 38, Commissioners Shiroma.
Commissioner Shiroma: Yes, thank you, President
Batjer. This is an extension order for the investigation
of Southern California Edison's 2018 Risk Assessment and
Mitigation Phase. AKA RAMP. I'm asking for your support
to extend the deadline for completion of this from
May 8 to October 22, 2020. While we have been
working on the adjustments needed to comport the Southern
California Edison General Rate Case with the new four
year requirements that also required an assessment
of potential updates to the previously previously filed
risk assessment mitigation phase report associated
with that rate case we do need more time. We are
tapping these two matters concurrently. We're
looking to harmonize them. But in order to bring
the two cases into alignment, again, the Southern
California Edison rate case, plus the RAMP, which had previously
been submitted, we won't need additional time.
So I do ask for your aye vote for the extension to October
22.
President Batjer: Okay. Thank you. There any questions or
comments on item 38? All right. Seeing none, will the
agenda clerk please call the roll?
Agenda Clerk: For Item 38, Commissioner
Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner
Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: President Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. The vote is unanimous for item 38. Moving now to
item 39. Commission Randolph.
<v Commissioner Randolph>This is a complaint case,
American Messaging Services versus AT&T. The
parties in the case have indicated they're working
towards a settlement. However, an agreement has not
been filed yet. This proposed decision would extend
the statutory deadline of this proceeding to November
15, 2020, which will allow us to go through all of
the procedural steps we need and to resolve this
matter. So I ask for your support.
President Batjer: Thank you, Commissioner
Randolph. Are there any questions on Item 39. Okay, seeing
none, will the agenda clerk please call the roll.
Agenda Clerk: For item 39, Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: President Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. The vote for item
number 39 are unanimous. Moving on now to Item 40 which
I will present. This order extending statutory deadline
is for 1.1508019 investigation to determine
whether PG&E's culture and governance prioritize
safety. In this proceeding, the Commission's Safety and
Enforcement Division was directed to investigate PG&e's
safety culture and to retain the services of an
expert consultant, Northstar Consulting Group, to assist
in that investigation. In December 18-11-050,
the Commission adopted North Star's assessment of
PG&E's Safety Culture and ordered PG&E to implement
the recommendations of the North Star report. PG&E's
bankruptcy proceedings have resulted in a delay in
this proceeding as a number of the issues overlap.
As such, this preceding has been on hold until the
PG&E bankruptcy proceedings resolve. Once those
proceedings are resolved, this proceeding will continue
It is therefore necessary to extend the statutory deadline
until November 8, 2020, to consider approaches to address
PG&E safety, culture and any additional steps
necessary as a result of PG&E's bankruptcy proceedings.
I request your support. Are there any questions on
item 40?
Okay, seeing none, I would ask the agenda clerk to
please call the roll.
Agenda Clerk: For item 40, Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Commissioner Randolph: Commissioner
Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commission Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Yes
Agenda Clerk: President
Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. Thank you. The vote is unanimous for item
40. Now, moving on to Item 41 which is also my item.
This is an order extending statutory deadline is for
R.17-05-010 rulemaking to consider revisions
to the Electric Rule 20. The Commission opened this
rulemaking to consider revisions to Rule 20, a program
to convert overhead distribution lines underground
electric facilities. On March 3, 2020, this proceeding
was reassigned to a ALJ Stephanie Wong. And just this
week, parties have provided comments on a Rule 20 staff
proposal and a PG&E Rule 20 audit report. After a review
of these comments, the Commission may request additional
stakeholder engagement in the form of workshops or
rulings with follow up questions regarding the staff
proposal. An extension of the statutory deadline to
April 10, 2021, is necessary to further develop the record,
issue a proposed decision, and allow the Commission
sufficient time to deliberate and to issue its final
decision. I hope to do that before a year has passed.
However, and with that, I request your
support of this item. Are there any comments on item
41?
Okay, seeing none, will the agenda clerk please call the
roll.
Agenda Clerk: For item 41, Commissioner Shiroma?
Commissioner Shiroma: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner
Guzman Aceves?
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner Randolph?
Commissioner Randolph: Aye.
Agenda Clerk: Commissioner
Rechtschaffen?
Commissioner Rechtschaffen: Yes.
President Batjer?
President Batjer: Aye. The votes are unanimous for item
41. Thank you very much for your, um
for your time, through the regular agenda.
Now we're moving on to the management reports. There
is no report for item 42 which is the report and discussion
on recent consumer protection and safety activity. And
no report for Item 44 which is the management report
on administrative activities. I will now turn to Executive
Director Alice Stebbins, who will introduce the speaker
that we will have today on Item 43, the Environmental
and Social Justice Action Plan Implementation Status
update. Alice?
Alice Stebbins: Thank you,
President Batjer. For item 43, I would like
to introduce Monica Palmera. She is the senior community
engagement liaison based in the news and outreach office
She manages the implementation of the Environmental
and Social Justice Action Plan. She will provide a
status report to us on implementation of the plan,
which, as you know, requires the support of the whole
CPUC. Monica?
Monica: All right. Can you all hear me?
President Batjer: We can.
Monica: All right,
Great. And then just one more logistical item. Are
you? Can you see slide 18 which is the cover slide
for the presentation?
Hopefully. Okay. Great. Perfect. Okay, my live
feed is a little delayed. So that's helpful. Well, thank
you so much, Commissioners, really appreciate your time
and attention to the Environmental and Social Justice
Action Plan or ESJ Action Plan. I know we're deep into
the lunch hour right now, so I will do my best to
go through this expeditiously. Today, just going
to give you an update on where we are on implementation.
The slide should say May 2020 Status Update rather
than April, and just want to acknowledge that there
were a lot of people that worked really hard to put
the status update together. But for technical ease, you'll
just be hearing from me today. So we'll go ahead and
dive in. I'll give you an overview of the plan, how
we're setting up an implementation structure internally
at the PUC. Also, some highlights of what's been done
so far to implement the plan and talk a little
bit about where we hope to go in the coming months.
So with that, I'll go ahead and go to next slide.
All right, so about the ESJ Action Plan, just as
a refresher. This plan was formally adopted by the
Commission in February of 2019. So just a little over
a year ago. And it really provides a comprehensive
framework that outlines how the CPUC will address
issues of environmental and social justice. Up
until this point, up until the plan was adopted, issues
were being addressed, certainly being addressed on
a program by program or proceeding by proceeding
basis. But I think it was widely acknowledged that
you know, we had communities and people knocking on
our door and helping us to acknowledge that we
have a big role to play. The decisions that we make
affect the livelihood and the lives directly of
communities in California. And so what this plan does
is outlines an overarching philosophy for how we
plan to address issues of environmental and social
justice and actually puts concrete steps in place for
us to do so. Next slide, should be on slide 20. So
now, just very quickly, want to highlight the nine
goals are outlined in the plan. First, to consistently
integrate equity and access considerations. In just a
CPUC proceedings, we want to increase investment in
clean energy resources, try to improve access to water,
communications, and transportation services. Increase
climate resiliency. Enhance outreach and public participation
that's that environmental and social justice communities can
participate in the process is in a meaningful way.
Want to enhance enforcement to ensure safety and consumer
protection. We're looking to promote economic and
work force development opportunity where we can within
our authority. We want to improve staff and staff
opportunities for staff to receive training on issues related
to environmental and social justice. But we as staff
are well equipped to handle issues as they arise, and
then also to monitor our efforts to evaluate and monitor
how we're doing so that we can continue to improve
upon our action. Next slide, should be slide 21, so in
the plan, underneath those nine overarching goals,
there are 95 discrete action items. We have counted every single
one on. I must say, you know, I have had the chance
to work on similar plans at other agencies, and I believe
this one is one of the most concrete and tangible plans
to implement equity considerations that I've seen
in an agency. I think it really robust and does
a good job. The action items are spread out across
the Commission across our divisions. So we have a lot
of action items in the Energy division and Communication
and Consumer Protection, as well with the News and
Outreach office, where I sit. And I'm happy to
report that progress has been made on all 95 action
items on and developed a system to systematically
track our progress on these action items, which we'll
talk a little bit about on the next slide, and
linked, I think, on the agenda and also available on
our Web page about the Environmental And Social Justice
Action Plan. You can find a full status report that
gives you a status update on each of those 95 action
items, so if folks really want to dive into the meat of how
we're doing on implementing these actions, that report
is now available. I'll just a little later in
the presentation I'll just highlight a few for you,
Commissioners. Next slide, slide 22. So, in terms of implementing
this plan, again, it was adopted a little over a year
ago in February 2019. We've been spending the last
several months creating an infrastructure internally
that subset we can cross the entire Commission and
systematically track how we're doing with our implementation.
So the way we were structured to do this is that we
have established a core team that spearheads implementation
across the Board. That consists of a lead from the
News and Outreach office, which is myself. I've also
had the great fortune to work very closely with key advisors
from Commissioner Rechtschaffen and Commissioner
Guzman Aceves. As was acknowledged in the public
comment, you both were spearheaded this
effort, and I've been working with their shark, Nicole
Crawford, Julia Schmidt, and together we coordinated
across the Commission on how implementation is going
So we consider ourselves the core team. But what I'm most excited
to present to you all is that we have established environmental
and social justice liaisons in each of the divisions
at the CPUC. So every division across all of our diverse
industry areas has a person who was tasked with, you
know, sort of the the more task-oriented work of tracking
our statuses, how we're doing on each of the action
items, but also serving as an ambassador in their division
for environmental and social justice issues, so really
taking up the mantle of understanding these issues
and understanding how they're playing out in their
division. So we've done that across all our divisions,
and one thing that we also want to do in, in addition
to just having the liasions is actually convene the
group. So we've had a couple of meetings in January
Monica: of 2020. Our first one was in January. And we, as the core team,
convened (mumbled) liaison what we can get together
We can actually talk about these issues, create a culture
around how we address these issues and very importantly
share lessons learned. Sometimes at the Commission
it can be hard to get together folks that work on different
industry areas. There isn't always a lot of space for
telecommunications to talk to energy to talk to rail
safety. And we want to create a space where we can
share what worked and what hasn't. As far as addressing
these issues and so that we can learn from each other.
That's something that we're really, really excited
about. And look to continue moving forward, and
then I will say that the ESJ liasions were instrumental
in gathering all of the status updates that are in
the report that's posted online. All right, next slide.
Should be slide 23. So far as where we are in implementing
the plan. Just gonna highlight some key actions thus
far. So many of the action item allude to specific proceedings
and preceding processes. And a few of these that
are here on the slide have some exciting new developments
related environmental and social justice. One is the
wildfire mitigation plan proceeding. We did a lot
of work to really encourage the utilities to
do much more robust outreach in-language to communities.
Actually, the picture that you see here on the slide
is of a work, a panel that we had at the workshop about wildfire
mitigation plans, that was made up of representatives
of folks living in rural communities, working with
farmworker communities, and folks who speak indigenous languages,
who had experience hardship in previous wildfire. And
so they were able to help us understand what are the
language needs of the parts of each community. And
we were able to incorporate a lot of their suggestions
and recommendations into requirements now for wildfire
mitigation. Which we're really excited about setting
a new precedent for utilities to really understand
what languages are in their community and work to reach
those folks effectively in the case of a wildfire.
Additionally, you know, in the climate adaptation preceding
there's a lot of really good work going on to defined
climate vulnerability. This is a really important topic
in environmental and social justice communities because
how climate change is going to affect front line communities
is something that requires a lot of thought and
care. And so to develop a definition of vulnerability
and understand how utilities will work with the communities
as they plan for the impacts of climate change is very
important. So a lot of really good work happening in that
phase. Additionally, in the affordability proceeding,
is a once in a nation leading proceeding that's looking
at how can we better understand the impact of rate
increases on a variety of household. Particularly how
it's gonna impact low income households and their budgets
and all the things that they have to consider. So there's
some really exciting work going on, and that's proceeding.
And then, you know, in the mobile home park
upgrade program, for example, that program is putting
higher prioritization on disadvantaged communities,
making sure investments go to those communities. And
that's exactly the kind of works we want to see
happen as this plan is being implemented. All right,
next slide, should be on slide 24. So one of the very
very big action item in the plan. They're action item 1.1
and 1.2, which is to incorporate environmental and social
justice impacts into our decisions and resolution. So
much like we consider safety considerations, we want
to start getting into a practice where we think about
what are the impacts of the decisions that we're making
on environmental and social justice communities. So
in terms of systematizing that and moving forward with
that Action item. The ALJ Division is the lead on that
action item, and we're working very closely with them
to understand How can you start incorporating this
into proceeding processes? Because we have such a
diversity of proceedings with the diversity of issue
areas, we're piloting, probablymight do this in two proceedings.
First in the CARE/ESA low income programs in the energy
division. AS well as we're looking to identify a rail crossing
proceeding to also pilot how we might consider ESJ
simpact in that process. The goal is that
is that we learned some important lessons through that
that such that we can create guidance that would apply
across our industry areas, and I'll also say, while we're,
you know, doing these, working on these pilot proceedings,
concurrently, we're also conducting some research on
best practices of how other agencies are doing the
very work, how they are evaluating environmental and
social justice impact, how they're able to incorporate
it into their decision making. And we're are starting
to work on general guidance that we think could be
implemented to further this action items, in addition
piloting it in the proceeding. Okay, next slide. I'm on
slide 25. And then also another big, you know, part
of the ESJ plan is to really increase participation
of stakeholders in our processes? You know, we have
a lot of different ways people can get involved, but
you know, often it requires a certain level of expertise
or involvement. We really want to do our best to
have an open door to folks that haven't historically
been a part of our processes. Some of the actions
that we've done, that we've taken now on the docket
card for our proceedings, there's the opportunity to provide public
comment there, so folks aren't able to come to our meetings
or come to our hearing, they can submit public comments
through there, and it's very easily accessible. Also
we're conducting a lot more robust outreach through community
based organizations on the ground and really encouraging
folks to get involved in proceedings or come to hearings
so that we can understand how some of our decisions
are playing out on the ground and how we can be better
informed in our decision making. We're also starting
to do tours and meetings as a part of off site
voting meetings, so when you Commissioners are traveling
for these meetings, and hopefully we'll get to do that
again at some point, trying to organize local
community visits and tours, so that while we're out
in the community, we take advantage of that time and
that travel, to meet on the ground with folks and get
to know people's lived experiences. And we're also doing
a lot of work to just simply update our collateral
materials. Make sure they're written in an accessible
way, as well as updating our website so that people
can find us and find our work more effectively. Next
slide, slide 26. And then, lastly, we are really working
to ramp up training and staff development on these
issue areas. We were able to be a part of a state
agency collaborative that put together a community
engagement and outreach training back in March.
So we worked with folks like CaliPA, the Air Resources
Board, Lands Commission and others to train
agency staff onto the engagement and outreach. And I'm
proud to report, CPUC, we had over 20 people show up.
We had the most representation of any other state agency
I'm really excited about that and hoped to bring that
training in house so that we can extend that opportunity
to more staff. We're also looking to bring training
on CalEnviroScreen which is a really helpful mapping
tool to identify environmental and social justice communities
or rather, I should say, disadvantaged communities
And then we'll also be a part of moving forward
the Government Alliance for Race and Equity. So we will
have a CPUC cohorts going through racial equity training,
actually, creating a racial equity plan for how we improve
upon those issues at the PUC. So all of that is happening
in the midst of of work that people are doing on a
daily basis. All right, next slide.
Slide 27. So give you all the good news. It wouldn't be
right to not talk about some challenges that we phase.
One of the big challenges in embarking and implementing
this plan is simply building awareness that the plan
exists. So a lot of the work thus far has been about
introducing the plan to staff, making staff aware of
all the definition that are in there, all action items
that are in there, and so the staff can start to use
and cite it in decisions and programs and advice
letters and whatnot. So, for example, for ESJ liaisons,
for any of them, when they were identified as ESJ
liaison. We introduced them to the plan for the first
time, and then they had to go in into their divisions
and do the hard work to actually educate their colleagues
about the plan, so that they could get status updates
for this report. So that kind of a web, that network
work is happening now, but it does take some time
but we're really committed to that. We want to
really build knowledge on definitions and best practices
internally at the Commission. But it has been something
that has been taken time and something we continue
to work on. The other big thing that we think is an
opportunity and what we'd really like to focus on moving
forward is doing a better job of collecting metrics
and data related to ESJ issues. So the status report offers
a lot of general updates on where our action items
are as far as being implemented. But what we really want
to do moving forward is really home in on what are
the specific updates or what's really happening from
ESJ perspective on that action item and start looking
at data across our action items so that we can compare
our, well, one, start to understand our impact a little
bit better. But also compare our programs and processes
a little bit so that we can understand really where
we're going. So what are some metrics we want to start
collecting across programs? And how do we do a better
job of evaluating where we are? We recognize that there's
a place we have a lot of growing to do, and we
look forward to looking to what other state agencies
have done and what communities recommend that we could
do a little bit better job with that moving forward.
I've almost done next slide. So in terms of timeline
and next steps, where we are. So we were able to give
the Disadvantaged Community Advisory Group of the CPUC
a version of this presentation earlier in April
so they are in the loop of what we're doing with the
plan. They were really big stakeholders in the creation
of the plan and it's really important that we stay committed
to having them involved in the implementation and then
coming up what I'll talk about is an update to the
plan. What we're gonna be doing, moving forward,
we're gonna continue convening the ESJ liaison.
Hopefully, on a monthly basis, to have conversation and
provide training where we can, and what we're really
looking towards is February 2021. That would be two
years since the plan was adopted. The plan does call
for an update every two years. So leading up to February
2021, we will be starting conversations about where
can we go with this plan? Where can we go with the
goals of plan within our division? And how can we push
ourselves to go further and to do more, to do right
by environmental and social justice communities? We're
already starting to talk to our liaisons about what
what action items they think could be incorporated into
the plan when we update it. We also will likely do
some kind of public workshop in the fall. So we can
involve the public in that conversation as well. And
we will return to you in February 2021 with
with the a new plan. All right, next slide. All
right. Thank you very much for this to be slide 29.
This is the picture of our ESJ liaisons. Again, just want
to thank you all for your time. And I'm happy to answer
any questions about where we are on implementation
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you very much. Monica, That was terrific
very informative and very helpful. So I'll
turn to the Commissioners. Does anyone have any questions
of Monica? Or the the great work that the team is
doing?
Commissioner Randolph: I have, waving my hand. Thank you, Monica.
I really appreciate that presentation. You all
have done a lot of work, and I like the, you
know, the effort to make sure you're quantifying
all of the action items and, you know, keeping us updated
on the status. I think that's an excellent way
to really be intentional about implementing this plan
I did have one question about the pilot
for the proceedings and incorporating environmental
justice issues in proceedings. I guess I was sort
of thinking at the time we passed the plan that
our goal in terms of incorporating these issues in
the proceedings would be a little more ambitious.
I think of a pilot program as kind of a way to
bite off small chunks and gather data. But as
you mentioned, our proceedings are across a lot of different
issues, a lot of different industries, and they're
very complex. So I'm not sure what the data gathering
benefit of a pilot would be. And I guess I was
looking for a little bit more of a kind of way to
incorporate environmental justice issues into all of
our proceedings and sort of figure out how to do that
at a time when OIR is drafted, at a
time when scoping memos are prepared
So I guess I would just like, maybe we could have
a little more engagement with ALJ division about
a way to broaden that effort to be a little more
cross cutting.
Monica: Sure. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you for that question.
Yeah, no, I mean, you hit the nail on the head, and I think
we're trying to figure out how fast we can go with
implementing this because, you know, we're thinking
about issue areas that are so diverse, we wanted to
get our feet wet a little bit on that first. But look
at it is we are starting to do some, you know
quite a bit of research on best practices and even
starting to put down some guidance that we think could
serve as sort of an overarching guidance for when
proceedings were started, for example, at the scoping
memo phase, a list of questions that would be asked
that would prompt ALJ and Commission offices to
think about the right kinds of questions that need
to be asked and incorporated into proceeding
So we're kind of moving on both fronts, and I'm happy
to talk more about it. We want to accelerate that process
or try to get that bite and a little faster. Happy
to consider that.
Commissioner Randolph: Okay.
Thank you. I'll follow up with you offline.
President Batjer: Any other comments or
questions from, yes, Commissioner Guzman Aceves?
<v Commissioner Guzman Aceves>Thank you.
And thank you, Monica, for the presentation
It is really exciting to see the engagement from so many
pieces of the organization and so much leadership
taking place by the liaison. I had, maybe it's
a little overlap with Commissioner Randolph's question
And how we can kind of further this a little bit.
although I do wanna acknowledge that I think the pilot
are great. Certainly it's not a great start
or great point to continue. I just noticed that
in some of the comments describing the progress on
the (mumbled) that you left in on the action progress
Some of the description of what they, of the progress
I don't want to really call anybody out there, so I should be
clear, seems to still lack basic understanding
of what a disproportionate impact is through a community
that is already cumulatively burdened by pollution
and poverty. And so I wonder in the training that
we're doing, you talked a lot about the outreach training
and participation on that, which is fantastic. And
I certiainly have seen a huge amount of progress in that area
But on the kind of analytical side of our policies
is it, perhaps this is a training that you're already
considering, and even, maybe, it could be coupled with
(mumbled) and guidance that you will be providing folks
maybe you can couple it with a training to really start to understand
that we're not just looking at, you know, this whole
notion of equity versus equality that you if have,
if our decisions are leading to certain facilities
that are polluting across the state, and everyone has
an equal share of that pollution. It's not what we're
talking about, what we're talking about is one more of the
facilities in the already impacted community is
creating an equity issue and so , I guess
the question is, can we please try to incorporate some
training on environmental justice? I mean, in any of these
actions that you're moving forward on the are going to touch
upon the different divisions within the Commission.
Monica: Yes, absolutely. I think just going back to some
of the descriptions in the status updates. I mean, we
are learning as ago. And certainly, you know, we asked
for a status update, and that's what we got was a status
update on where things were in the particular action
item. So I think won't even just let them
learn to think of this forward is certainly to your
point like how do we prompt for more information about
the ESJ impact in particular? So that's something
we definitely learned through this process. But you're
absolutely right. And it kind of ties back to what
I was talking about. The work that our ESJ liasion had
to do when they were turning to their colleagues to ask
about where these action items where, it was explaining
the plan to start and what these issues are? And it was
like our liasions there are starting to take on that
tack of articulating what cumulative impact means
and things like that. So we do have a good bit
of work to do to systematize knowledge on what
these things mean. One way we wanted to start, and I flashed
it up earlier, is even without training on the tool
of CalEniviroScreen. A lot of at the Commission work
with that tool, but a lot of folks don't and aren't
aware of it, aren't aware of how it measures cumulative
impacts on communities from an environmental insistent
economic framework. So that something we would
actually open up to the whole Commission so that we
can start to have that conversation and make those
opportunities available. Obviously, to know how to
use a tool like CalEnviroscreen, but also to start
asking the right questions of Oh, how might this impact
communities in different geography? Or how might
this play out differently in different places? We know
we have a lot of work to do to get that conversation
going on a very on a fast level. But I appreciate
that you mentioned it could be coupled with the guidance
that would be a part of the the proceedings. I hadn't
thought about it. We haven't thought about it quite
that way, but yeah, that is work that we want to do,
is just trying to figure out the best way to do that
across the Commission is what we'll be exploring.
President Batjer: Thank you. Yes, Commissioner Rechtchaffen?
<v Commissioner Rechtschaffen>Thank you. Just a
couple of things I wanted to add. First, I agree
with Commissioner Randolph and about the desirability
of accelerating our efforts to identify environmental
social justice issues in proceedings or resolutions.
And hopefully we can find a way to do that. Take the
lessons from the pilot and or best practices that
you're examining. And I'd certainly be happy to work with
you, in my office to work with you to help develop
a standard checklist, even if it's an interim check
list that could be used both by ALJ and Industry divisions
so that we can get that review, that
screening in place sooner rather than later.
That's first I more, more broadly, I want to thank you,
Monica, for the great job you've done for leading our
efforts to implement the plan that I'm delighted we've
made progress on so many things. Many big things, many
small things. It takes a lot of coordination and communication
effort work with everybody. I want to thank the industry
liaisons for their time and effort and for you identifying
them. That's the way something like this really makes
progress. Thank you for identifying the Nicole Copper
and Ewan Schmidt and Sarah Sharp in my office, Commissioner
Guzman Aceves's office. It's been an excellent
team working on this and look forward to the next,
the updat in 2021. I do wanna report one other, one
other big area where we're making progress and which
I learned about this week is we, one of the action
items calls for a partnership with the Workforce Development
Board in a memorandum of understanding with them to
develop workforce development standards for several
of different areas within the Commission's jurisdiction.
And we are, we have a draft now with the agency that's working
its way through industry division's legal. And we'll
be seeing that coming forward. The other Commissioners
soon. So that's another area. Very significant progress
Thanks.
Monica: Absolutely. Thank you
President Batjer: Yes, Commissioner Shiroma.
Commissioner Shiroma: Yes. Thank you, President
Batjer. I'm also adding my thanks to Monica
and the team and appreciation that the CARE/ESA proceeding
will be one of the front and center pilot programs
And while many of us may think that CARE/ESA,you know,
it is already with core program that we do towards
for many years now addressing the issues of low
income communities, and environment and social justice
communities, there is still so much more we can
learn and can do. And some of these criteria that
are included really are gonna be important in terms
of providing for improving training
and staff development. Promoting economic workforce development, thinking
about the ESA part of that program, and really
looking to assure that we are not allowing any sort of implicit
bias, which I don't think goes into our teams at the
CPUC in terms of how low income communites are
provided for. You know, I think back on my own
kids through the various public assistance programs
of providing money for families like ours to buy food
and then the food stamp program, and you know,
stigmas that can occur with with such programs where
low income families do, they feel that they're being
looked down upon. Anyway. Look forward to working with
the, ESJ team on CARE/ESA. And one other question
Monica. In the spreadsheet, there were a couple boxes
one of them had to do with tribal outreach, another one was lifeline
things that more guidance is needed. And I wonder if you
could clarify guidance from the Commissions, guidance
from management team, or guidance from the community?
Where's that guidance needed?
Monica: Oh, it might be best
if I get back to you on specific action items. It
would be great if I could look back with her our
communications team. I don't wanna don't speak for
folks. And again, sort of hindering the process
with not having them on the line right now. I just
want to put a pin in those questions because I don't
know exactly off the top of my head, but I
will follow up with that. I just wanted to thank you
Commissioner Shiroma for lifting up that, you know
we do have the robust public purpose program that have
a long history and a track record of doing a lot of
good in those programs. I think we want to build on
that strong foundation and just really start to understand
the impact of those programs on different kinds of
communities. Just taking a more nuanced lens
to okay, it's great that we offer these programs. Who
is getting them? Who's not getting them? How we
do you need we take it to the next step. So
I appreciate you highlighting that, I promise I'll get back to won't
get back to you on the specific questions related to
Lifeline. And I think you said tribal outreach. I'll follow up.
President Batjer: All right. Thank you. Are there any other comments
or questions of Monica? Well, again, Monica, thank
you so much for the presentation. And I echo the
the words of my fellow Commissioners on their gratitude
and thoughts on and thankfulness that the program
is doing as well as it is. And we all stand
ready to help you with further implementation. So thank
you again for the update. And we will now move
on in the agenda to the Commissioner Reports. So, as
I always say, who would like to go first?
Okay. Martha. Commissioner Guzman Aceves.
Commissioner Guzman Aceves: Thank you.
Okay, I have a couple of updates. One is to share
that I have a new rotational adviser, Justin Long.
He is joining my office, most recently from the Commission's
Consumer Affairs branch. He was also previously an
electric rates analyst in the Public Advocates office,
and previously joining the Commission, he worked in analytics
for various technology start ups and consulting firms. In his
free time, Justin enjoys doing hot yoga, eating lobster
and sushi and visiting dog parks to find short and stubby
friends. So please help me in welcoming Justin.
And he's gonna be doing a variety of issues.
Thank you. And the other thing I wanted to do is to take the
time to update you guys on a proposed decision that
was issued yesterday that is
related to disconnections. So disconnection
proceedings. I wanted to thank my Bagley-Keene partner,
Commissioner Randolph for all of her important guidance
in getting to this part of the process for these products. But
the reason I wanted to spend real time updating on
this supposed decisions because it is a quasi legislative
proceeding and therefore we will not be able to have
a regulated meeting on it until we get that
legislative fix someday. So I just wanted to highlight
some of the critical components of the PD and really
emphasize that this comes at a critical time as we contend
with all of the needs on how to respond to this crisis
and including how to best recover from it. As
we all know, we did do an emergency consumer protections
decision for COVID that put in place many critical protections,
such as no disconnections for a year. And to their credit
although we did hear some concerning news about that today,
the IOUs have stepped up and are implementing
this order. And I also wanted to recognize that
there is a bit of a distinction, as I mentioned earlier
with the situation that we have on the broadband side.
We are not able to implement these typse of basic
safety net protections. But anyhow, after the last
recession, the 2008 Recession, disconnections
continue to rise, long after the unemployment rate
dropped. Recovery from COVID may similarly
be long and difficult. Customers will be faced, as we
heard today with many accumulated bills, including
rent and utilities. These potentially large (mumbled)
an increased risk of future disconnection. Unless
they find a manageable way to begin to pay
the arrears down. All of our IOUs have already
implemented measures to aid customers, including longer
term payment plan, and this PD will build on those measures
by providing in arrearage management plan for the
extreme cases of arrears. In particular, we modeled the
arrears payment plan after the successful experience
in several East Coast states that are served by the
Eversource Energy IOU, and that gives the eligible
customers debt in return for monthly on time utility payments.
We also proposed to eliminate those additional re-connection
fees and deposits as you heard today, that further hinder
the climb out of debt and into recovery. It's important
to note that currently deposits are disproportionately
charged to only 3 to 5% of IOU customers.
Those that cannot put up a guarantee. In fact, in
my last update of Consumer Affairs Branch included
a case where this requirement is currently preventing
the customer from reconnecting. This is an antiquated
and regressive policy and needs to go. We are fortunate
with this proceeding to have had the last two years
to examine the legislative directive that was given
to us by Senator Wessel FC592 to investigate the then
rising disconnection levels that was continuing post-recession
and to establish strategy for reducing them. Having
had this time to really dig into a variety of existing
measures and best practices among our regulated IOUs
among public power agencies and other utility programs
from across the country. As well as hearing directly
from the public throughout the state at six
workshop we held in communities faced with the highest
rate of the disconnections, and additionally, we hosted
various webinars where we heard from utilities like
SMUD, where they shared their successful and much more
efficient partnership with local NGOs, including an
online utility order for likely providers that
they started over 10 years ago. We also had a webinar
on the arrears management plan, wher Eversource presented
their 12 year old successful offering of the payment
plan in the states that they serve.
They have seen a tremendous change in behavior with
the offering of that payment. We also had our own
IOUs share some of their most practices with each other.
Like SDG&E's elektronic notifications have helped
reduce their levels of dsconnection. And, of course
you heard directly from customers on the local videos
that support them from being disconnected. Who really
helped us refine many elements of a decision, but especially
the extra protections for vulnerable customers that
are needed. The PD also has other components
such as fulfilling the requirements of SB 1338, another
Wester Bill that was directing us to increase the enrollment
in Medical Baseline and we heard of all the different
sub elements of that very much during the PSPS
events, coupled with the elements in President Batjer's
PSPS proposed decisions. That is including additional
elements that increase that enrollment and that outreach. Finally
in line with the fundamental premise of this proceeding,
that the inability to pay is the main cause of disconnection.
There are generally two reasons you're unable to pay.
You don't have sufficient income because loss of employment
or you don't have sufficient income to pay your
bills because the bill is too high. We have multiple
measures in the PD focused on the former and have adapted
protections for customers who have a temporary loss
of income due to unemployment like the payment plan
However, aside from our existing bill discount program
the Karen Farrell program, we do not have a lot of measures
to address the affordability leading to disconnection because
of the level of the bill. For that reason, the PD also
includes the process utilities and ratepayer advocates
to work together on the development of a pilot to test
the builder cap to no more than 2 to 4% of a low income
customers income. Affordability is also a major driver
leading produces disconnection and therefore a solution
being to provide affordable bills. There's many more
measures in the PD. These are really the
highlights that I wanted to share. And I won't go
through the process of the usual thanking of folks
because obviously we don't have a finished product
yet, but I do want to, obviously, I know you'll be
discussing with the assigned Administrative Law Judge Joe
Kelly and the Energy Division Bruce Kenshiro, who have
both been tremendous on this, so I thank you for
your indulgence on letting me share with you personally
And I look forward to being able to vote on this.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Okay. Thank you very much,
Commissioner Guzman Aceves. Very helpful.
Yes, Commissioner Shiroma?
<v Commissioner Shiroma>Thank you, President
Batjer. And thank you, Commissioner Guzman Aceves. I have
two reports. One, both brief, one is to let everyone
know that we, my office intends to have an all party meeting
on CARE. Speaking of CARE. which is a California Alternative
Rates for Energy program with is the discount
program for low income families and individuals.
In light of current events and a keen interest in
how the CPUC is helping Californians where the
COVID
the crisis.
There has been a keen interest in ideas on further
education and outreach for CARE. To you really assure
that we're reaching everybody who does need help with
their utility bills. So we will be putting together
details, I anticipate that this all party meeting will
occur later this month of May. We'll be providing more
details, and we will notice it so that Commissioners can
attend and participate if they would like to. Okay.
The other thing I wanted to highlight is that May has
been historically the Asian Pacific Islander American
Heritage Month. We take a moment to celebrate
that very rich and wonderful heritage. We recognize
contributions and influence of Asian Americans
and Pacific Islander Americans to the history, culture,
achievements of California and the United States. As everyone
knows, the Commission got its start as the Railroad Commission
and there were 15,000 to 20,000 Chinese immigrants
who made a major contribution and sacrifice, sometimes
with their life for the construction of the continental
railroad. Now California has really had a checkered
past of discrimination against Asian Americans and
Pacific Islanders. You know, a few examples from
the, from the time of statehood in the mid 1800s
the Chinese Exclusion Act, the denial of public health
to communities of Asian Islander heritage and ethnicity
and then course of the implementation of Executive
Order 9066 which, incarcerated thousands
of California because of their Japanese ethnicity into
camps. And we hope to have learned from this, I think
we have things we've learned from it, but even now, there
are folks in our Asian American and Pacific Islander community
that are suffering after discrimination due to fears
of COVID 19. We all know that COVID 19 is a
public health issue, not a racial issue. During this
unprecedented time of the COVID 19 crisis, it is
essential the people of all cultures and backgrounds
come together to support everyone in our communities
and to really enjoy and celebrate the rich and wonderful
heritage of the Asian Pacific Islander community.
Thank you.
President Batjer: Thank you.
Commissioner Shirahama. Um, are there any
other Commissioners would like to give a report. I
have a brief one. Yes, Commissioner Rechtschaffen.
Commissioner Shiroma: Thank you
for reminding us about that Commissioner Shiroma, and it's
all too timely reminder given hate crimes, the uptick
in hate crimes we've seen recently. I just want to say I miss
you guys. I miss working with my colleagues,
I missed being around the PUC, and on the staff
and the energy that working together provides. I am, I
want to echo what President Batjer said and Commissioner
Guzman Aceves said at the start, that our staff
has been extraordinary. They continue to excel, I'm extremely
proud of working at the PUC and all the work we're doing
to protect the public and respond to this crisis.
President Batjer: Thank you. I miss you all too. I'm in the office. Molly's
here, the Lynn is out there.
<v Commissioner Rechtschaffen>But I miss Director
Stebbins snacks, especially during the meeting. Maybe
you get, you may be getting if you're in the Sacramento
office.
President Batjer: No, no, I will admit to you all, I stuck
my hand in my drawer and pulled out a couple M&Ms.
So bad on me. But my tummy was starting to
growl. So, Commissioner Randolph, did you have any
any report you wanted to make today?
Commissioner Randolph: No, I think
I'll, I will wait till next meeting.
President Batjer: OK, so I'm going
to make a brief one, because I do not, I do hear
tummy's growling. So earlier this week, Governor
Newsome issued a proclamation declaring this week
Wildfire Preparedness Week in California. As we
are all very aware, recent years have brought
some of the most deadly and destructive wildfires our
state has seen and with dry conditions from last year's
dry winter. It is likely, or this year's as well,
it is likely to be another high risk fire season again,
this yea. CalFire has reported that there are already
400 more fires than the average for this time last
year. As we prepare for this coming wildfire season,
the question isn't if there will be wildfires. The
question is where and when, which underscores deeply
the need to focus on preparedness. Lead agencies like
CalFire and the California Governor's Office of Emergency
Services have been working at an astonishing pace on
fuel reduction projects and how to plan, how to safeguard
communities against catastrophic wildfires. Well, these
agencies are expediting work to protect Californians
Wildfire Preparedness week is an opportunity for
each of us before wildfire season starts could consider
the steps we can take to help protect ourselves and
others. With this in mind, CalFire has revamped its
Wildfire Preparedness Website, which is www.readyforwildfire.org
where Californians can learn
about steps to take more, to be, steps to be
more prepared and actions to protect homes and prepare
for evacuation. As we're in the midst of the California's
Wildfire Preparedness Week, I'd also like to highlight
an important milestone in the CPUC work to better
protect our communities from wildfires. Today, the CPUC's
Wildfire Safety Division issued a draft action
statement addressing the Electric Utilities 2020 Wildfire
Mitigation plans with additional requirements that
the utilities must implement to increase safety and
decrease the likelihood of catastrophic wildfires in
2020 and beyond planning is essential to mitigating
the threat of utility ignited wildfires. To that effect
the CPUC Wildfire Safety Division has developed a framework
to assess the utilities plans and current abilities
to mitigate wildfires. The CPUC's 2020 guidelines significantly
raised standards and expectations for the utilities'
developed welfare mitigation plans that include stronger
rationales and data to support their chosen wildfire
safety initiative. I encourage everyone to review
the draft actions and consider submitting comments on
them before the 20-day deadline. The draft approvals
can be found on the Wildfire Mitigation Plans section
of the CPUC's website.
So that finishes out the Commissioner's reports. Please
everyone stay healthy. Stay safe. This public meaning
is now adjourned. Be smart and wise, and please keep
practising social distance, distancing.
Tough word to get out. Six feet everyone. So thank you
all this. This public meeting is adjourned