MINUTES
of the
POWER PLANT TASK FORCE
SPECIAL MEETING
Thursday, June 16, 2005 at 6:00 p.m.
Potrero Hill Neighborhood House
953 De Haro Street, San Francisco
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 4:20 p.m.
Present :
John Borg Dana Lanza
Joe Boss Richard Millet
Philip DeAndrade Steven Moss
John Kosinsky Karen Pierce
Absent: Toby Levy
2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Chair DeAndrade stated that the approval of the minutes would be put over until the next regular meeting.
3. STATUS OF POWER PLANTS IN SOUTHEAST SAN FRANCISCO
a. SFPUC: San Francisco Electricity Reliability Plan—Karen Kubek,
Project Manager. Purpose of project is to improve air quality and eliminate older in-City generation units. Combustion Turbine project is part of PUC comprehensive energy solution that includes renewables,
Power Plant Task Force
Agenda
June 16, 2005
Page 2
solar, wind, wave, energy reduction, combustion turbine project, generation and
co-generation. Is following the CAL-ISO Action Plan adopted November, 2004. It is a roadmap that lays down the items that must be completed in order to shut down in-City generation, e.g., Hunters Point Power Plant and Potrero Power Plant. One of turbines will be located at San Francisco International Airport; other three turbines will be located inside San Francisco at 25th and Maryland.
Will be submitting a mitigation plan to the CEC at the end of June and looking to complete licensing with the CEC around February, 2006. The goal is the permanent retirement of the Hunter’s Point and Potrero Power Plants and minimal operation of any new plants.
b. Mirant: status of Potrero Unit 3 after removal of Run/Must Run—Ron Keno, Director of Environmental Health & Safety
Question of what happens to Potrero 3 if the RMR contract is removed. Mirant does not know. If Mirant does not believe it can cover its costs, it will have to decide whether it is financially feasible to run the plant. Have to look at highest and best uses for the plant. Much depends on the market. Mirant is presently in Chapter 11 bankruptcy and looking at options. Is upgrading Potrero 3 to make it cleaner. Cannot commit to shutting down Potrero.
c. California Independent System Operator (ISO): Action Plan—Gary De Shazo
The Action Plan has not changed but the inservice dates have been modified. Old Plan. Original plan had Potrero 3 being removed from RMR agreement last in the process. But there was a request to remove Potrero 4, 5 and 6, which was adopted.
After the CTs are sited, Potrero 3 can be released from RMR; after the transmission projects are finished, 4, 5 and 6 can be released from RMR agreements. ISO will designate Hunters Point 1 and 4 as an RMR unit. It will be approved and contract renewed for 2006. Once Jefferson Martin transmission line is completed, Hunters Point and Potrero will be able to be retired. PG&E is on schedule with Jefferson Martin and should complete it by June, 2006.
d. PG&E: status of Hunters Point Units 1 and 4; transmission upgrades—Jimy Harris, Public Affairs Representative.
PG&E has been working on nine transmission projects; seven are completed with two remaining. Completion of these projects will enable closure of Hunters Point.
Power Plant Task Force
Agenda
June 16, 2005
Page 3
Jessie Thomas and Darilyn Davis also spoke on behalf of PG&E, explaining the transmission project between Potrero and Hunters Point.
Barbara Hale, PUC Deputy General Manager for Power reported that the PUC is considering different power sources in the Electricity Resource Plan, including wave power and whether the PUC should establish an off-shore wave power project. Considering contributing to a tidal power study in Marin County.
4. TASK FORCE RESOLUTION RE SITING OF THE COMBUSTION TURBINE UNITS (CTs)
Mr. Moss stated that the Task Force has always wanted to close the power plants; that he does not want to vote for the CTs. He asked Ms. Hale to explain why we need CTs. She responded that the City needs the CTs because we have reliability criteria established by the ISO that says we need to have in-city generation in combination with transmission that PG&E is installing. CTs present a near-term solution. Wave power and tidal power are considerations but would not be available for a long time. The CT’s represent a solution that contemplates quality of life improvements in the near future. If there are no CTs and Mirant continues to run Potrero, there will be no locally-owned generation which will put the City at a disadvantage in many ways.
Ms. Pierce: stated that she was not prepared to vote for the CTs until she has the confidence that all the old power is shut down. There is not a date certain for closure. If the old plants are not shut down, then there is no reason to add more generators.
Ms. Lanza: proposed that group make a decision tonight.
Mr. Boss: when Mirant bought Potrero Power Plant from PG&E, PG&E promised to shut down the other power plant which was also on the market. Mirant then applies to the CEC to build a 540mw plant. The City and other interveners stopped it. Williams settles with state of California and gave the City five combustion turbines after the Resource Plan was written. Turbines enabled implementation of Resource Plan. He is in favor of the CTs. Task Force resolution states that group is in favor of CTs based on a number of conditions.
Mr. Millet: supports the CTs.
Power Plant Task Force
Agenda
June 16, 2005
Page 4
Ms. Pierce asked that the resolution be tabled; cannot presently vote on it; wants to better understand what Mirant meant by market conditions as a determinant of whether Potrero is shut down.
Mr. Moss: believes that CTs are the fastest way to close Potrero; but wants to know if there is anything we can get to provide us with anymore assurances that Mirant will close; wants to know if why it is important for the Task Force to vote on this.
On advice of City Attorney, Ms. Pierce moved to hold the resolution until the next meeting; Mr. Millet seconded the motion.
Mr. Borg: agreed with Moss; believes that the resolution language has to change base on Mirant’s information that closure will be based on market conditions.
Ms. Kubek: stated that time was short, that the project has a schedule to follow and the PUC wants the support of the Task Force when it goes back to the Board of Supervisors.
Ms. Lanza: changed her mind on calling for a vote on resolution to support CTs until the Water Board meets.
Mr. DeAndrade: Task Force should move vote to the next meeting and that he wanted to hear more discussion about Mirant’s economics re closing the Potrero.
On the motion to put over the vote to the next regular Task Force meeting, there were two nays and six yeses and the vote was continued to the next meeting.
5. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
