Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 3700 City of Palo Alto (ID # 3700) City Council Informational Report Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 5/6/2013 May 06, 2013 Page 1 of 2 (ID # 3700) Title: Utilities Policies and Plans Subject: Utilities Resource Management Operating Policies and Plans From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation This report is provided to the City Council for its information only. Executive Summary Several key policies and plans provide direction to staff on resource acquisition and management. However, after adoption of the policies and plans, there has not been a single document where they are located and can easily be reviewed. Therefore, staff prepares a compendium of the relevant high-level plans and policies and provides them to the UAC and Council annually. The plans and policies included in the document are as follows: 1. The equity transfer policy, which describes the adopted methodology for making the equity transfer from the Gas and Electric Funds to the General Fund; 2. The policies for management of certain Utilities financial reserves, including: a. Emergency Plant Replacement Reserve for the Electric, Gas, Water, and Wastewater Collection Funds; b. The Rate Stabilization Reserves for Electric Supply, Electric Distribution, Gas Supply, Gas Distribution, Water, Wastewater Collection, and Fiber; and c. The Electric Special Project Reserve; 3. The latest Council-approved Legislative Policy Guidelines, which provide direction on the City’s positions on legislative initiatives; 4. The long-term plans for resource acquisition and management including the Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP), the Gas Utility Long-term Plan (GULP), the Water Integrated Resource Plan (WIRP), and the Carbon Neutral Plan for Electric Supply; 5. The Utilities Strategic Plan; and 6. The long-term goals for water and energy efficiency programs. There are other relevant plans and policies, but they are broader than Utilities or are reported to the UAC and Council separately. These policies and plans include the Energy Risk Management Policy, the Urban Water Management Plan, and the Demand-Side Management Implementation Plan. May 06, 2013 Page 2 of 2 (ID # 3700) The changes from last year’s version of this document include: 1. Changes to LEAP were approved by Council in April 2012 to clarify the rate impact limit and other details of the LEAP strategy related to the Renewable Portfolio Standard. 2. Changes to GULP were approved by Council in April 2012 to align GULP Objectives and Strategies towards discontinuing the laddered purchasing strategy and implementing monthly-varying, market-based natural gas supply rates. 3. Council approved updated Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 in January 2013. 4. The 10-year gas and electricity energy efficiency (EE) goals were updated by Council in December 2012. 5. Addition of the Carbon Neutral Plan for Electric Supply, which was adopted by Council on March 4, 2013. The parts of the document that did not change from last year include: 1. The Utilities Strategic Plan, which was approved by Council in July 2011. 2. The equity transfer policy, which was approved by Council in June 2009. 3. The long-term water efficiency goals, which are incorporated in the Council-adopted 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Attachments:  Attachment A: Resource Management Operating Policies and Plans (PDF)  Exhibits to Attachment A (PDF) Attachment A i Resource Management Operating Policies and Plans April 2013 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 1 2. Utilities Strategic Plan ................................................................................................ 1 3. Equity Transfer Methodology ..................................................................................... 1 Background ................................................................................................................... 1 Approved Equity Transfer Methodology ...................................................................... 5 4. Legislative Policy Guidelines ....................................................................................... 5 2013 Legislative Policy Guidelines ...................................................................................... 5 Background ................................................................................................................... 5 Approved Guidelines ..................................................................................................... 5 5. Financial Reserves ...................................................................................................... 5 Emergency Plant Replacement Reserves ............................................................................ 5 Background ................................................................................................................... 5 Approved Guideline: ..................................................................................................... 6 Rate Stabilization Reserves ................................................................................................. 6 Background ................................................................................................................... 6 Approved Guidelines ..................................................................................................... 6 Electric Special Project Reserve (formerly the Calaveras Reserve) .................................... 7 Background ................................................................................................................... 7 Approved Guidelines ..................................................................................................... 8 6. Resource Plans ........................................................................................................... 8 Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) ......................................................................... 8 Gas Utility Long-term Plan (GULP) ...................................................................................... 8 Water Integrated Resource Plan (WIRP) ............................................................................ 9 Long-term Efficiency Goals ................................................................................................. 9 Water ............................................................................................................................ 9 Electricity ....................................................................................................................... 9 Natural Gas ................................................................................................................. 10 Carbon Neutral Plan .......................................................................................................... 11 7. List of Exhibits .......................................................................................................... 11 1. 2011 Utilities Strategic Plan .................................................................................... 11 2. 2013 Legislative Policy Guidelines .......................................................................... 11 3. Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) ............................................................. 11 4. Gas Utility Long-term Plan (GULP) .......................................................................... 11 5. Water Integrated Resource Plan (WIRP) ................................................................ 11 6. Carbon Neutral Plan ................................................................................................ 11 Attachment A 1 Resource Management Operating Policies and Plans April 2013 1. Introduction Purpose This document is meant to collect all the Council-approved policies and plans that guide the management of the Utilities water, gas, and electric commodity resources. The document will be updated when new policies or plans are adopted, or existing ones are changed. Since a new Council is seated in January every two years, the document will be provided to Council in April annually so that the new Council will be aware of Council policy. This practice will afford the Council with an opportunity to review and direct revisions of any of the commodity resource management policies and plans on an ongoing basis. 2. Utilities Strategic Plan On July 18, 2011, Council adopted the 2011 Utilities Strategic Plan. The 2011 plan replaced the prior plan, which was approved in 2005. The UAC reviewed the plan many times during its development and established a subcommittee in April 2010 to assist staff in developing the plan. Following a recommendation from the UAC subcommittee, staff interviewed key stakeholders to assist in the development of an overall vision for CPAU. The adopted 2011 Utilities Strategic Plan (provided in Exhibit 1) identifies strategic objectives, performance measures and targets under each of the four perspectives: 1. Customer and community; 2. Internal business process; 3. People and technology; and 4. Financial. The UAC and Council receive semi-annual updates on the 2011 Utilities Strategic Plan. 3. Equity Transfer Methodology Background As a result of the initial investment made by the City and its citizens, Palo Alto’s residents and businesses have enjoyed favorable rates and utility services provided by the City’s municipal utility. The services provided by the Gas and Electric Funds provide a return on investment to the General Fund in the form of Utility Fund transfers, as established in the City’s Charter. Article VII, Section 2 – Public utilities revenue, of the City Charter states: The revenue of each public utility shall be kept in a separate fund from all other receipts and shall be used for the purposes and in the order as follows: Attachment A 2 (a) For the payment of the operating and maintenance expenses of such utility, including the necessary contribution to retirement of its employees. (b) For the payment of interest on the bonded debt incurred for the construction or acquisition of such utility. (c) For the payment of the principal of said debt, as it may become due. (d) For capital expenditures of such utility. (e) For the annual payment into a reserve fund for contingencies, of an amount not to exceed ten percent of the expenditure for capital outlay for the year, exclusive of bond fund expenditures. The total accumulated in this reserve for contingencies shall at no time exceed five percent of the book value of the utility's capital in service. This reserve fund shall be available for use by the utility, only for replacements or emergency repairs and after special appropriation by the council. (f) The remainder shall be paid into the general fund by quarterly allotments. The methodology of calculating the equity transfer has changed over the years. In July 1982, the City executed a contract with Price Waterhouse to evaluate and determine the appropriateness of the method utilized for determining the transfer from the Utilities Funds to the General Fund. The Price Waterhouse study noted that the City had a practice for its 82-year history of generating net income based on the provisions of the City Charter cited above. As part of the study, Price Waterhouse conducted a survey of how cities determine an appropriate transfer to their General Funds. This survey concluded that many methods were in use, but that cash transfers from proprietary funds to the General Fund are a common and accepted practice for cities in California and other states. The most common method was based on a percentage of revenues. The most common method for investor-owned utilities was the Utility Enterprise Method (UEM) that bases the equity transfers upon a rate of return on the asset base. The method links the transfer to the total investment made in the utility. In January 1983, Council was provided with the Transfers to the General Fund Study completed by Price Waterhouse [CMR: 143:3]. The study recommended the use of the UEM in which the proprietary enterprises (water, gas and electric) are viewed as taxpayers’ assets that should yield a reasonable return on the assets dedicated to the systems. Using the UEM, the transfer to the General Fund is calculated by multiplying the net plant assets of each utility by the rate of return. The study also recommended the City Council consider a “range of reasonableness” in determining the appropriate transfer to the General Fund. The recommended “range of reasonableness” included a lower and upper boundary on the rate of return to be used in the UEM calculation. The lower end of the range used a rate of return equal to the current rate on Treasury bonds, a long-term, risk-free investment. The upper end of the range would be based on the rate equal to that used by the California Public Utilities Commission for investor-owned utilities, such as PG&E. In 1996, a landmark electric utility deregulation bill (AB 1890) was passed by the California legislature. It allowed, as of March 31, 1998, customers to choose their electric commodity Attachment A 3 supplier. In addition, the Utility Infrastructure Improvement Program (UIIP), which began in FY 1991, had led to increased funding of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects, increasing the asset bases of the Water, Gas, and Electric Funds. Since the UEM is based on the asset base, the UIIP led to an increase in the level of transfers to the General Fund. The combined effect of customers potentially “leaving” the Palo Alto system in order to be served by an alternate commodity supplier and the upward pressure on rates caused by rapidly increasing transfers to the General Fund led staff to review the equity transfer methodology. Responding to these conditions, in 1997, the City Council froze transfers from the Gas, Water and Electric Funds to the General Fund at FY 1997 levels of $11.835 million annually. In 1999, the City selected R. W. Beck to evaluate methodologies for Utility Fund transfers to the General Fund. The study’s scope included the review of existing transfer methodologies, identification of alternative methodologies, and the development of recommendations. The R. W. Beck study, completed in March 2000, concluded that the current UEM transfer methodology is viable if it undergoes certain modifications to recognize the risk associated with the electric and gas supply business. The analysis performed in 2000 resulted in a recommendation that the City adopt an equity transfer policy similar to the UEM that had been adopted by the City after the 1982 Price Waterhouse study. The final recommendation contained in R.W. Beck’s 2000 report was not ultimately adopted by the City. The UAC reviewed the R. W. Beck Utility Funds Transfer Study in March 2000 and concurred with staff’s recommendation to change the transfer methodology as follows:  For the Water Fund, increase the transfer at an annual rate of 3 percent per year.  For the Electric Fund, calculate the transfer based on 14.5 percent of Adjusted Sales Revenue (ASR), where ASR is defined as the metered sales revenue less the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) expenditures.  For the Gas Fund, use the same basic methodology, but use 15 percent of ASR in the calculation.  Include in the methodology a sharing arrangement in case of a loss faced by one of the utility funds. In April 2000, the City Council approved the recommended methodology for the equity transfers [CMR: 223:00] beginning in FY 2001. However, the new UEM-based methodology was only in use for one year. In FY 2002 the equity transfer from the Electric and Gas Funds was changed so that the equity transfers increased by 3% from the previous year’s transfer amounts as was being done in the Water Fund. The City hired the firm of Black and Veatch in 2008 to review the Water Fund equity transfer. After examining the water equity transfer methodology study and the practices of other public agencies, the City ceased the equity transfer to the General Fund from the Water Fund beginning in FY 2010. In addition, R. W. Beck was engaged in early 2009 to review its Attachment A 4 recommendations from 2000 and to again evaluate alternate equity transfer methodologies for the Gas and Electric Funds. R. W. Beck completed its review of the electric and gas equity transfers in February 2009, identifying alternative methodologies and recommending a methodology for the future that it considered fair and reasonable. R. W. Beck recommended that the City employ a Return on Rate Base method similar to the UEM utilized in the past by Palo Alto. The method requires the annual calculation of the “rate base” for the Electric and Gas Funds. The rate base contains the following components that are added together:  Net asset value of the utility assets as of the latest audited fiscal year. This is calculated every year by the Administrative Services Department. The net asset value is adjusted every year by that year’s capital additions and reductions for depreciation, which is based on the life of each asset. The latest audited net asset value will be found in the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR);  Working capital for the supply purchases for the upcoming fiscal year. This is calculated by multiplying the budgeted cost for supply purchases by 1/12 since the City needs to reserve sufficient funds for one month of these costs;  Working capital for the non-energy supply operating costs for the upcoming fiscal year. This is calculated by multiplying these costs by 1/8 since there is approximately a 45-day lag from customer usage of the energy deliveries and payment received for the energy deliveries;  Additional capital projects budgeted during the current fiscal year. This is equal to the additional budgeted capital improvements minus the expected customer funded improvements; and  Depreciation for the current fiscal year. This is the estimated depreciation on the utility assets for the current fiscal year, which will result in a reduction of the asset base. The rate base is then multiplied by an appropriate return on equity to calculate the equity transfer. R. W. Beck recommends using an adjusted return on equity based on the return on equity allowed by the California Public Utilities Commission for PG&E. R. W. Beck recommended methodology has two adjustments to PG&E’s allowed return on equity to account for differences between an investor owned utility (IOU) like PG&E, and a municipally owned utility. The first adjustment is a tax adjustment and the second is a risk adjustment. The tax adjustment compensates for the fact that the City of Palo Alto Utilities is a tax-exempt entity and the City does not pay taxes on its collected return. The tax adjustment is 30%, which is reflective of the total tax rate for taxable entities. The risk adjustment is based on the concept that an investment in a municipal utility is less risky than an investment in an IOU. R. W. Beck advised that the difference in yield between corporate bonds and municipal bonds cannot be entirely explained by the tax adjustment alone. R. W. Beck recommends a 15% factor for this risk adjustment. The calculation of the return on equity appropriate for Palo Alto, then is equal to PG&E’s approved return on equity multiplied by 0.70 (1-.30, the tax adjustment) multiplied by 0.85 (1- Attachment A 5 .15, the risk adjustment). As an example, using PG&E’s current approved return on equity of 10.4%1, the total return for Palo Alto would be equal to 10.4% times 0.7 times 0.85, or 6.19%. When this return on equity is multiplied by the rate base, calculated as described above, the answer is the equity transfer for the Electric and Gas Funds. Approved Equity Transfer Methodology Council adopted the current equity transfer methodology, based on R. W. Beck’s recommendation on June 15, 2009 with the FY 2010 budget. 4. Legislative Policy Guidelines 2013 Legislative Policy Guidelines Background The utility industry is a high profile and heavily regulated industry that is subject to copious legislative action at both the state and federal level. Such legislation can influence, among other things, the reliability and security of the supply and distribution infrastructure, commodity procurement practices, customer service and billing, program design, rate design, and activities and costs associated with climate protection. Representatives of the City (elected officials and staff) participate in Federal and State legislative forums to advocate positions on energy and water-related issues that facilitate the City’s Utilities Department’s key objectives of providing valued utility services to customers and dependable returns to the City, and employing balanced environmental solutions. The City’s Utilities Department also participates in joint action efforts to advocate for goals and objectives shared by other publically owned utilities. A set of policy guidelines is developed each year that identifies the goals and priorities for the Utilities Department to be applied by staff when evaluating legislation. While the guidelines are used by staff for evaluating legislation, any advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the approval of the Utilities Director or City Manager per the City’s legislative advocacy process. Approved Guidelines Council approved the 2013 Legislative Policy Guidelines by Resolution on January 28, 2013 [Staff Report #3408]. The 2013 Legislative Policy Guidelines are provided as Exhibit B. 5. Financial Reserves Emergency Plant Replacement Reserves Background The Emergency Plant Replacement (EPR) Reserve was established by Article VII, Section 2(e) of the City Charter for the Electric, Water, Gas, and Wastewater Collection Funds for unplanned 1 In December 2012, the California Public Utilities Commission changed PG&E’s allowed return on equity from 11.35% to 10.40%. Attachment A 6 emergencies (or “contingencies”) only. The City has rarely used the Electric, Gas, Water, or Wastewater Collection EPR Reserves. The last time any of these EPR Reserves was tapped was in 1998 when the Electric EPR Reserve was used to cover the cost to replace a blown transformer. The introduction of the minimum guideline level in February 2007 [CMR: 143:07] was made in recognition of the City’s property loss insurance policies. On June 15, 2009, the Council modified the minimum guideline level of the EPR Reserves [CMR: 281:09] to ensure that the EPR Reserves can cover the deductible amount to be equal to the liability insurance coverage deductible amount (currently $1 million). This would ensure that the full amount needed would be available for any unforeseen emergency where equipment needed to be repaired or replaced in order to ensure that the distribution systems continued to operate. Approved Guideline: Currently, the minimum guideline level for the Electric, Water, Gas, and Wastewater Collection Emergency Plant Replacement Reserves is equal to the City’s liability insurance coverage deductible amount. Rate Stabilization Reserves Background Council established Rate Stabilization Reserves (RSRs) in May 1993 [CMR: 263:93] for the Water, Electric, Gas and Wastewater Collection Funds. The purpose of the RSRs is to stabilize rates by ensuring funds are available to cover short-term situations when expenditures exceed revenues, to provide a depository of excess funds when expenditures are less than projected or revenues are higher than budgeted, and to plan for certain known future occurrences that are of a one-time nature, or to ramp up if the expense is of an ongoing nature. Over time, the RSR guidelines have been changed to respond to changing needs. The approved guidelines include a requirement approved by Council in February 2007 [CMR: 143:07] that the development of an assessment of the risks facing each fund be undertaken as part of the annual budget and retail rate development and approval process. This short-term risk assessment has been performed annually starting with Fiscal Year (FY) 2008. The last time Council changed the RSR guidelines was on June 15, 2009 [CMR: 281:09] when the minimum and maximum guideline levels for the Electric Distribution RSR, Gas Distribution RSR, Gas Supply RSR, Wastewater Collection RSR and Water RSR were changed. The Electric Supply RSR was last adjusted by Council in February 2007 [CMR: 143:07]. Approved Guidelines 1. All RSRs: The target level of the RSRs for each budget year to be established following an annual evaluation of risks to each fund as part of budget preparation. 2. Electric Distribution RSR: Minimum guideline level = 15% of sales revenue, maximum guideline level = 30% of sales revenue. Attachment A 7 3. Electric Supply RSR: Minimum guideline level = 50% of supply purchase cost, maximum guideline level = 100% of supply purchase cost. 4. Gas Distribution RSR: Minimum guideline level = 15% of sales revenue, maximum guideline level = 30% of sales revenue. 5. Gas Supply RSR: Minimum guideline level = 25% of supply purchase cost, maximum guideline level = 50% of supply purchase cost. 6. Wastewater Collection RSR: Minimum guideline level = 15% of sales revenue, maximum guideline level = 30% of sales revenue. 7. Water RSR: Minimum guideline level = 15% of sales revenue, maximum guideline level = 30% of sales revenue. These guidelines are summarized in the table below. Reserve Minimum Guideline Levels Maximum Guideline Levels Electric Distribution RSR 15% of sales revenue 30% of sales revenue Electric Supply RSR 50% of supply purchase cost 100% of supply purchase cost Gas Distribution RSR 15% of sales revenue 30% of sales revenue Gas Supply RSR 25% of supply purchase cost 50% of supply purchase cost Wastewater Collection RSR 15% of sales revenue 30% of sales revenue Water RSR 15% of sales revenue 30% of sales revenue Electric Special Project Reserve (formerly the Calaveras Reserve) Background In 1983, the City Council established the Calaveras Reserve in the Electric Fund to help defray a portion of the annual debt service costs associated with the Calaveras Hydroelectric Project, which was put in service at that time. As originally established, the Calaveras Reserve policy did not provide for a target balance and depletion of the reserve was anticipated by 2002. California Assembly Bill 1890 was adopted in 1996, which provided for the deregulation of California’s electric industry effective January 1, 1998. A key element of deregulation was the provision for Direct Access, which would allow electric customers to choose their electric commodity supplier. The City of Palo Alto Utilities (City), along with other California utilities, were faced with the prospect of losing customers and load to Direct Access and being saddled with expensive generation assets purchased or built to serve these customers. In response, Council changed the purpose of the Calaveras Reserve in 1996 [CMR: 214:96] and authorized collections from electric ratepayers to cover the amount that certain electric assets’ costs were projected to be higher than their market value in the future (i.e., stranded cost). In 1999, Council ceased collecting funds for these stranded costs and established the Calaveras Reserve Target and Guidelines with a schedule to draw down the funds through the end of FY 2033. In 2001, the California electric industry faced an energy crisis triggering wholesale power price spikes and rolling blackouts throughout the state. The crisis was blamed on poor deregulation market design and market manipulation by energy suppliers. As a result, Direct Access was suspended in California for the investor-owned utilities and, subsequently, the City suspended its Direct Access program. Further, as a result of changing market conditions and the Attachment A 8 assignment of certain electric assets, the estimate of the City’s stranded cost is lower now than when stranded cost collections stopped in 1999. In June 2008, the City permanently assigned away its share in the Seattle City Light Exchange. Further, a 15-year assignment of the City’s share in the California-Oregon Transmission Project (COTP) was executed in January 2009. The assignments of the COTP and Seattle City Light Exchange effectively eliminate stranded costs associated with these two electric assets. On July 15, 2009, Council adopted updated Calaveras Reserve Guidelines [CMR: 275:09] which required annual calculations of short- and long-term stranded costs and established the minimum annual transfer from the Calaveras Reserve to the Electric Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve equal to the short-term stranded cost. The guidelines also directed staff to work with the UAC to recommend projects that would benefit electric ratepayers for the use of any funds available in excess of long-term stranded costs. On November 1, 2011 [Staff Report 2160], Council changed the name of the Calaveras Reserve to the Electric Special Projects (ESP) Reserve and adopted guidelines for the ESP Reserve. Approved Guidelines 1. The purpose of the ESP Reserve is to fund projects that benefit electric ratepayers 2. ESP Reserve funds are to be used for projects of significant impact; 3. Projects proposed for funding must demonstrate a need and value to electric ratepayers. The projects must have verifiable value and not be speculative, or be high risk in nature; 4. Projects proposed for funding must be substantial in size, requiring funding of at least $1 million; 5. A goal is to identify preferred projects for the ESP Reserve by end of fiscal year (FY) 2015; 6. Any uncommitted funds remaining at the end of FY 2020 will be transferred to the Electric Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve and the ESP Reserve will be closed; and 7. Funds may be used for analysis and pilot projects which would be the basis for planned large projects. 6. Resource Plans Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) The LEAP Objectives and Strategies were last approved by Council on April 16, 2012 [Staff Report 2710]. The changes since the prior year included updates to LEAP Strategy #3 (Renewable Portfolio Standard) to clarify the intent of the rate impact limit. The approved LEAP Objectives, Strategies and Implementation Plan are provided as Exhibit 3. Gas Utility Long-term Plan (GULP) A major update to the GULP Objectives and Strategies was approved by Council on March 7, 2011 [Staff Report 1317]. At its November 1, 2011 meeting, the Council directed staff to Attachment A 9 develop market price-based, monthly-adjusted gas supply rates [Staff Report #2106]. The transition to market-based gas supply rates required revisions to GULP Objective 1, GULP Strategies 1 and 2, and GULP Implementation Plan Items 1 and 3. On April 23, 2012, Council approved those changes [Staff Report #2552]. The approved GULP Objectives, Strategies and Implementation Plan are provided as Exhibit 4. Water Integrated Resource Plan (WIRP) The WIRP Guidelines were adopted by Resolution by the City Council on December 8, 2003 [CMR:547:03]. The approved WIRP Guidelines are provided as Exhibit 5. Long-term Efficiency Goals Water The 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) approved by Council on June 13, 2011 [Staff Report 1688]. State law requires urban water suppliers to prepare, or update the UWMP every five years to ensure adequate water supplies are available to meet existing and future water demands over a 20-year planning horizon. In the 2005 UWMP, water savings from efficiency measures was expected to be 4.3% by 2030, while the 2010 UWMP forecasts water efficiency savings to account for 13% of projected water demand by 2030. The City plans to use new measures to achieve the significant increase in water conservation savings when compared to the 2005 UWMP. The water efficiency goals from the 2010 UWMP are shown in the table below. 2010 UWMP Water Savings Summary 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Total Water Savings MGD) 0.37 0.97 1.47 1.62 2.02 Total Wastewater Savings (MGD) 0.21 0.57 0.85 0.91 1.05 Total Outdoor Savings (MGD) 0.16 0.40 0.62 0.71 0.97 Cumulative Savings as a Percent of Water Demand 2% 7% 10% 11% 13% Electricity State law (AB 2021, 2006) requires municipal electric utilities to develop ten-year electric EE plans and submit them to the California Energy Commission (CEC) every three years. Consistent with state law, the City Council approved the 2007 Ten-Year Electric EE Plan in April 2007. The 2007 Electric EE Plan’s goal was to meet 3.5% of the electric energy needs of the City by energy efficiency by the end of the 10-year planning period. On May 3, 2010, Council approved the 2010 10-year Electric EE Plan with a goal to save 7.2% of the electric needs of the City by 2020 [CMR: 218:10]. The updated goal is more than double the savings goal in the 2007 Plan. On December 17, 2012, Council approved updated annual and cumulative Electric Energy Efficiency Goals for the period 2014 to 2023 [Staff Report 3358] as shown in the table below. Attachment A 10 Fiscal Year Annual Incremental Electric EE Savings (% of total City customer usage) 2014 0.6% 2015 0.6% 2016 0.6% 2017 0.6% 2018 0.6% 2019 0.6% 2020 0.65% 2021 0.65% 2022 0.7% 2023 0.7% Cumulative 10-year EE Goal 4.8% The cumulative 10-year Electric EE goal of saving 4.8% of the City’s electric usage is lower than the 2010 goal primarily due to the significant savings that are attributable to changes in building codes and appliance standards, which can’t be counted for the City’s EE program savings. Natural Gas In 2007, Council approved the first ten-year gas energy efficiency (EE) goal—to reduce gas usage by 3.5% by 2017. On April 11, 2011, Council approved an updated ten-year gas EE goal to reduce gas usage by 5.5% by 2020 [Staff Report 1532]. On December 17, 2012, Council approved updated annual and cumulative Gas EE Goals for the period 2014 to 2023 [Staff Report 3358] as shown in the table below. Fiscal Year Annual Incremental Electric EE Savings (% of total City customer usage) 2014 0.5% 2015 0.5% 2016 0.5% 2017 0.55% 2018 0.55% 2019 0.6% 2020 0.6% 2021 0.65% 2022 0.65% 2023 0.65% Cumulative 10-year EE Goal 2.75% Attachment A 11 The cumulative 10-year Gas EE goal of saving 2.75% of the City’s electric usage is lower than the 2010 goal primarily due to the significant savings that are attributable to changes in building codes and appliance standards, which can’t be counted for the City’s EE program savings. Carbon Neutral Plan The Carbon Neutral Plan for the Electric Supply Portfolio was adopted by Resolution by the City Council on March 4, 2013 [Staff Report 3550]. The approved Carbon Neutral Plan is provided as Exhibit 6. 7. List of Exhibits 1. 2011 Utilities Strategic Plan 2. 2013 Legislative Policy Guidelines 3. Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) 4. Gas Utility Long-term Plan (GULP) 5. Water Integrated Resource Plan (WIRP) 6. Carbon Neutral Plan Exhibit 1 to Attachment A Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives Approved by Council on July 18, 2011 (Staff Report #1880) 1 Strategic Objective Objective Statement Performance Measure 2015 Target Strategic Initiative Customer and Community Perspective C1. “I receive safe and reliable service.” Customers expect that Utilities services are provided on a continuous basis, without interruption. In addition, customers expect that the Utilities delivery systems are safe and will not harm them or put them in any danger. We will listen to our customers and seek to understand their reliability and safety concerns and implement programs and projects to address them. Average time to restore service per interrupted customer Less than 90 minutes Number of electric system interruptions per year for average customer Ranks in the top quartile nationwide (less than three) C2. “Be responsive to all my utilities- related service needs.” We understand that the customer wants clear, accurate bills with easy methods of payment; access to usage history and enough understanding to efficiently manage usage; to feel quickly and completely “taken care of” when they have concerns, questions or requests and to be communicated with effectively both as individuals and as CPAU’s owners. One of the ways to achieve this is to elicit feedback from customers to help improve service. Customer satisfaction scores on annual surveys for overall value. Ranking in the top two utilities statewide By the end of 2011, establish mechanisms to elicit customer feedback on their satisfaction with all interactions with CPAU. C3. “I expect to pay a reasonable bill” We understand that customers expect their bills to be comparable to those in surrounding communities and do not expect to pay more than PG&E customers. Customers believe it is reasonable to pay slightly more in exchange for increased reliability, safety and protection of the environment. However, customers’ overall bills for Utilities services must remain reasonable and be reasonably stable and should not increase significantly in any one year. Customers also want their bills to provide useful information about their consumption of resources in addition to the rate so that they can understand how they The average combined residential customer bill for electricity, water, gas, and wastewater services Less than the average of bills for comparable services in nearby communities (MP, MV, SC, Hayward, RC, Roseville, and Alameda). Reassess the design and delivery of the Utilities bill to improve understandability and implement the changes by 2012. Reassess the gas Exhibit 1 to Attachment A Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives Approved by Council on July 18, 2011 (Staff Report #1880) 2 Strategic Objective Objective Statement Performance Measure 2015 Target Strategic Initiative can influence their total cost for Utilities services. For natural gas service, Palo Alto’s supply cost has been relatively stable due to a laddered gas portfolio purchasing strategy; however, this strategy needs to be re-evaluated as gas prices are currently low and are projected to stay low for the foreseeable future. Although, the average bill for all services should be comparable to those in surrounding communities, staff will continue to monitor and report the bills for each service separately on a quarterly basis. Annual rate change Maximum of 10% per year for electric and wastewater services. Maximum of 20% per year for water service. portfolio laddering purchasing strategy (GULP initiative) and develop a rate change performance measure for gas service. C4. “Care for our environment” Our community wants its customer-owned utility to offer choices for them to manage their resource use in ways that reflect their environmental values. Utilities will improve existing programs and develop new programs to meet customer needs and allow customers to manage their own environmental footprint. Percentage of customers participating in the PaloAltoGreen program Top rank nationally Redesign the PaloAltoGreen program by June 2012 (LEAP task). Internal Business Process Perspective Safety and Reliability BP1. Ensure a reliable supply of utility resources We will implement strategies that ensure the reliable supply of utility resources to meet present and future needs. To provide opportunities for economic development within Palo Alto, we must provide sufficient resources that meet the short and long-term needs of our customers. To achieve this we will maintain the utility system components, and provide for adequate utility resource supplies to our current and future customers. We will also develop new management practices and organizational structure to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements. Duration of electric system interruption per year for average customer Ranks in the top quartile nationwide (less than 60 minutes per customer) Develop a plan to complete a new electric transmission interconnection by the end of 2011. Response time to water and wastewater leaks Under 30 minutes BP2. Operate the utility systems safely We will continue to ensure the safety of our customers, employees and the community by the ongoing implementation of a safety programs. Protecting customers and employees from injury and customer’s property from damage is essential for delivering quality utility services to our customers. The safety programs will be AGA (American Gas Association) Incidence Rate Less than industry (APPA, APGA, AWWA) average with a goal of 0 Exhibit 1 to Attachment A Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives Approved by Council on July 18, 2011 (Staff Report #1880) 3 Strategic Objective Objective Statement Performance Measure 2015 Target Strategic Initiative implemented by updating safety procedures, educating customers via outreach materials and workshops, correcting system deficiencies, operating in accordance with existing safety rules, and ensuring that products delivered to customers are safe. Customer awareness of gas safety issues 90% of customers responding to annual gas customer safety awareness survey BP3. Replace infrastructure before the end of its useful life We will continue to implement a long-term strategy for replacing infrastructure before the end of its useful life. Reliable delivery of electric service to our customers is critical for the success of business and the quality of life for our residents. To accomplish this, we will focus on reducing the backlog and replaces infrastructure systems in a manner that spreads the expense across multiple years resulting in program with even expenditures patterns in future years. Backlog of infrastructure elements whose age is beyond its useful life. Zero Customer Service Excellence BP4. Serve customers promptly and completely We will provide customers with the highly responsive service they desire. We will do this by reviewing and improving our processes for managing accounts, handling payments, resolving billing issues, responding to information and field service requests and notifying customers during service disruptions. We will identify ways to streamline these processes and implement changes. Specifically, we will review, document and improve business processes that have been identified as having long customer response times. Average phone wait time Less than 90 seconds Number of billing adjustments 10% reduction from number in 2009. BP5. Communic ate clearly and pro-actively with all our stakeholders We will proactively communicate with all our stakeholders, including all customer groups, civic leaders, community groups and the press. To achieve this objective we will provide the information needed for our stakeholders to effectively access, understand and utilize all utilities services and programs. In addition, we will design communication vehicles and dissemination processes that will enable our residents to be educated owners of their municipal utilities system. For example, Palo Alto’s gas rate stability is something customers should be educated about as it differentiates CPAU from PG&E. Time until informing the public and local media of a disruption affecting at least 500 customers or any sensitive major customers Less than 90 minutes after becoming aware of a disruption Prepare a Utilities Communications Plan by June 2011 that incorporates increased use of neighborhood and business organizations and schools to disseminate program and educational information. Exhibit 1 to Attachment A Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives Approved by Council on July 18, 2011 (Staff Report #1880) 4 Strategic Objective Objective Statement Performance Measure 2015 Target Strategic Initiative BP6. Offer programs to meet the needs of customers and the community We will assist customers to lower their cost of utilities services and support the environment. We will assist customers facing economic hardship by offering bill payment assistance programs. We will educate customers on the reasons for and their means of compliance with our safety and regulatory requirements. We will also identify all customer groups, identify any gaps in service provision to those customers, and propose new programs or changes to existing programs to close those gaps. Participant* satisfaction with Utilities programs (*rebate recipients, workshop attendees, callers, etc.) At least 90% of program participants satisfied with their experience Reduce Costs BP7. Negotiate supply contracts to minimize financial risk We will continue to negotiate supply contracts to acquire supply resources while managing supply portfolio cost uncertainty to meet rate and reserve objectives and following sound risk management practices. To ensure that we are buying commodities at as competitive prices as possible, we will negotiate contracts with new counterparties to continue to have a sufficient set of credit-worthy trading partners. We will continue to develop long-term acquisition policies and plans (LEAP and GULP) and update those plans at least every three years. We will also determine all that is necessary to execute a gas prepay transaction as that is one clear way to lower the cost of gas supply resources. Number of competitive bids received for each fixed-price transaction. Minimum of three Pursue gas prepay transactions to leverage the City’s low cost of capital and tax-exempt status to acquire lower cost gas supply resources (GULP Strategy). BP8. Reduce cost of delivering service through best management practices We will reduce the cost of delivering service to customers. We will identify opportunities to better coordinate between Utilities and other City departments to improve efficient delivery of services. We will perform benchmarking studies to identify potential modifications to procedures, practices, materials, and plans and to ensure that we are following best practices. One best practice is to increase calibration and replacement schedules for gas and water meters since the meters slow over time so that the actual usage is under-recorded, resulting in lost revenue. “lost and unaccounted for” volumes of gas and water 80% of 2009 levels. Actively participate in Citywide efforts to improve the procurement process. Exhibit 1 to Attachment A Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives Approved by Council on July 18, 2011 (Staff Report #1880) 5 Strategic Objective Objective Statement Performance Measure 2015 Target Strategic Initiative BP9. Maximize value of existing generation assets Palo Alto owns significant supply resource assets including a portion of the Calaveras Hydroelectric Project, a contract with the Western Area Power Administration, a permanent allocation of water from the regional water system managed by San Francisco, and allocated capacity on a gas transportation pipeline. We will seek out both daily and operational and long-term opportunities to optimize the value of these assets to enhance revenue and/or to reduce costs. We will work with joint-owners of our resource assets to leverage those resources and advocate to maintain or improve the value of existing resources into the future (LEAP and GULP strategies). Value harvested from Redwood gas pipeline capacity 100% Evaluate and implement opportunities to maximize the value of the Calaveras project in the new electric market framework. BP10. Manage implementation of strategic plan Completing the strategic plan is only the beginning of getting value from the strategic planning process. Ongoing management of the strategies and initiatives and reporting on progress of those initiatives is essential to achieving positive results from the strategy. We will report to the UAC and Council on plan progress twice annually and we will review and revise the objectives and develop new initiatives on an annual basis. Number of strategic initiatives completed 100% Develop a program to ensure that the strategic plan is pursued and that objectives and initiatives are managed Environmental Sustainability BP11. Increase the environmental sustainability of all Utilities activities Adding sustainable resources to the supply portfolios will help the City meet its Climate Protection Plan goals by reducing the carbon footprint of the utility services provided to our customers. We will achieve this by acquiring renewable resources and promoting the development of local renewable resources within the rate objectives in the Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP). Sustainable practices will be pursued not just for the supply portfolios, but across all the Utilities day-to-day operations. Carbon intensity of the electric portfolio 80% of baseline (2005) level BP12. Promote efficient use of resources Resource efficiency programs meet our customers’ desire for environmental solutions that save money as well as contributing towards the Climate Protection Plan goals. We will promote resource efficiency by dedicating the tactical staffing and budgetary resources Actual electric energy efficiency achievement At least as high as goals set in May 2010 By June 2011, develop implementation plans to achieve the long- term water and energy Exhibit 1 to Attachment A Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives Approved by Council on July 18, 2011 (Staff Report #1880) 6 Strategic Objective Objective Statement Performance Measure 2015 Target Strategic Initiative necessary to reach maximum deployment of economically feasible resource efficiency. We will revise and document our long-term efficiency strategies by updating our 10-year Energy Efficiency goals every three years and updating our water efficiency goals every five years in the Urban Water Management Plan. To maximize the savings potential for new development, coordinate with the City’s Economic Development Manager to ensure that new developments incorporate energy saving features in the design phase. Actual gas energy efficiency achievement At least as high as goals set in January 2011 efficiency goals and implement programs as outlined in the implementation plans. People and Technology Perspective PT1. Be an attractive place to work We will create a positive values-based work environment which attracts and retains qualified staff. To achieve this objective we will try to better understand employees desires and incentives, and will articulate our values both internally and as we recruit. Employee satisfaction rating Improvement from baseline level Implement an annual survey to determine employee satisfaction levels and establish the baseline satisfaction level for 2011. PT2. Obtain, develop and train employees to ensure an adequate and qualified workforce A properly sized, trained and certified workforce is essential to our effectiveness. We will identify skill and staffing gaps at the individual and organizational levels and seek to fill those gaps through the effective use of opportunities including hiring, mentorship programs, role rotations, knowledge transfer opportunities, long-term developmental assignments and both internal and external training opportunities. We will plan for workforce succession and provide cross-training opportunities for employees to improve employee satisfaction and build a more robust work force Percentage of operations personnel that has appropriate certification and training required for working in all areas they may be assigned 100% Develop a 5-year succession plan for each division. Exhibit 1 to Attachment A Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives Approved by Council on July 18, 2011 (Staff Report #1880) 7 Strategic Objective Objective Statement Performance Measure 2015 Target Strategic Initiative PT3. Ensure employees have adequate tools to perform job duties As major users of technology assets, we must have access to quality and timely delivered IT services. We must build and maintain an effective relationship with the City’s IT division that includes clear, frequent communication as well as productive coordination. We will collaborate with IT to identify barriers to providing support for technology projects and remove them. In those instances in which our immediate technology needs cannot be addressed by the City’s IT division in a timely or sufficiently-comprehensive fashion, we will utilize external expertise. Technology needs being met 100% for all Utilities work groups Develop a Utilities- specific IT strategic plan. PT4. Investigate and adopt innovative technologies Our customers value Utilities embracing new technologies that will help reduce costs and/or meet Climate Protection Plan goals. We will innovate by researching technologies and cultivating relationships with entrepreneurs and academics to identify new cost-effective and environmentally sustainable technologies to consider adopting. The smart grid strategic plan will be complete by the end of FY 2012 and new technologies, programs, and projects identified in the plan will be implemented. Number of new technologies evaluated per year by an in-depth study or pilot project Three Develop a process to evaluate and implement new technology through targeted programs and consider creating a fund for innovative projects and pilots. Financial Perspective F1. Maintain financial strength Maintaining a high credit rating reduces the cost of borrowing if needed for capital projects. We will continue best practices for financial management, adhere to energy risk management policies and guidelines to minimize financial risk, and maintain sufficient reserves to cover debt obligations as required to retain CPAU’s current favorable bond rating so that the cost of capital is low for any bond funded capital projects. Credit rating At least AA as determined by Fitch Ratings or Standard and Poor’s or at least Aa3 as determined by Moody’s Exhibit 1 to Attachment A Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives Approved by Council on July 18, 2011 (Staff Report #1880) 8 Strategic Objective Objective Statement Performance Measure 2015 Target Strategic Initiative F2. Maintain adequate reserves Maintaining adequate cash reserves contributes to maintaining our overall financial health and retaining our current favorable bond rating. We will maintain Rate Stabilization Reserves levels within Council-approved guidelines and sufficient to provide rate stability as desired by ratepayers. During the annual budget and rate setting process, the risks that each Utilities fund is exposed to will be identified along with the trajectory of costs and revenues to allow Council to determine appropriate reserve levels and rate adjustments. Rate Stabilization Reserve levels Adequate to cover cost uncertainties over a two-year period while meeting rate stability objective Re-evaluate the need for and purpose of the Calaveras (stranded cost) Reserve by the end of 2011. F3. Implement rate structures that balance cost of service and resource conservation Retail rates should be designed so that the revenues from a customer group match the cost to serve those customers. Rates consist of fixed charges and volumetric charges, which are based on usage. Fixed costs consist of customer-related costs (meter reading, billing, etc.) and costs related to capital projects and operations while variable costs include the cost of buying supplies (water, gas, or electricity). When fixed costs are recovered through charges based on usage, costs will not be recovered if customers reduce usage more than projected. To address this problem we will examine alternate rate structures that strike a balance between the two competing objectives (cost of service and resource efficiency) to ensure that certain fixed costs are recovered with a fixed charge, but other costs are recovered with charges that vary depending on usage (volumetric charges). By the end of 2011, evaluate the appropriate fraction of fixed costs that should be collected by fixed charges versus volumetric charges. F4. Provide a fair return to the City CPAU provides an equity transfer to the City of Palo Alto’s General Fund which provides a return on the City’s original investment in the Utilities and reflects the City’s ultimate responsibility for Utilities operations. Council approved the current equity transfer method in May 2009. The equity transfer is used by the General Fund as determined by the City Council and supports activities such as fire, police and library services to the City residents and businesses. This benefit, along with favorable rates and utility services, is a key value provided to the community from municipal ownership of Utilities. Equity transfer to the City’s General Fund 100% of the transfer as calculated by the Council-approved equity transfer methodology and permitted by law. 9 Maintain adequate reserves Maintain financial strength Implement rate structures that balance cost of service and resource conservationFinancial Resources People and Technology Be an attractive place to work Obtain, develop and train employees to ensure an adequate and qualified workforce Ensure employees have adequate tools to perform job duties Values: Honesty and Integrity Teamwork Accountability Quality of Service “Be responsive to all my Utilities services- related needs” “I receive safe and reliable service” “I expect to pay a reasonable bill” “Care for our environment” Vision: We Deliver Extraordinary Value to Our Customers Strategic Destination: We will earn the high satisfaction of our customers with our cost- competitive provision of safe, reliable and environmentally sustainable utility services Customer Operate the Utilities systems safely Reliability and Safety Customer Service Excellence Manage Cost Environmental Sustainability Serve customers promptly and completely Offer programs to meet the needs of customers and the community Communicate clearly and proactively with all our stakeholders Negotiate supply contracts to minimize financial risk Reduce cost of delivering service through best management practices Internal Business Processes Increase the environmental sustainability of all Utilities operations Promote efficient use of resources Investigate and adopt innovative technologies Ensure a reliable supply of utility resources Replace infrastructure before the end of its useful life Maximize value of existing generation assets Manage implementation of strategic plan Provide a fair return to the City  Exhibit 2 to Attachment A    1    Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013  Adopted by Council on January 28, 2013 (Staff Report 3408)    Advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the approval of the  Utilities Director or City Manager as per the City’s legislative advocacy process    ALL UTILITIES  Goals  1. Preserve/enhance local accountability in the control and oversight of matters impacting utility  programs and rates for our customers while balancing statewide climate protection goals.  2. Support efforts to maintain or improve the reliability of the supply, transmission, storage and  distribution/collection infrastructures.  3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas (GHG)  emissions, and recognizes early voluntary action.  4. Maintain the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) ability to provide safe, reliable, sustainable, and  competitively‐priced utility services.  Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals     1. Local  Accountability 2. Reliability  &  Infrastructure  3. Climate  Protection 4. Service  & Cost  Control  1. Advocate goals through active  participation in joint action efforts.  Federal,  State, and  Regional       2. Communicate the City’s record on  environmental and energy efficiency  programs with Legislature, California  Energy Commission (CEC), California  Air Resources Board (CARB), and  Natural Resources Defense Council  (NRDC) via California Municipal  Utilities Association (CMUA),  Northern California Power Agency  (NCPA), and the Bay Area Water  Supply and Conservation Agency  (BAWSCA).  State      Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 2 of 13      1. Local  Accountability 2. Reliability  &  Infrastructure  3. Climate  Protection 4. Service  & Cost  Control  3. Support legislation that will result in  the most cost‐effective reduction of  GHG emissions, recognition of early  action, and inclusion of more efficient  solutions, fuel switching, and demand  control programs, in integrated  resource plans.  Federal,  State, and  Regional       4. Promote utility legislation and  regulations that support reasonable  reliability standards and compliance  requirements, and effective and  consistent reporting requirements,  customer communications, and goal‐ setting.  Federal,  State, and  Regional  Reliability  Councils         5. Oppose cost shifts from Federal or  State budgets and California Public  Utilities Commission (CPUC)  jurisdictional utilities through active  participation in CMUA and NCPA  legislative activities.  Federal,  State, and  CPUC        6. Advocate for State and Federal grants  for local and regional applications of  energy efficiency, conservation,  renewable resources, fiber,  wastewater collection systems and  recycled water projects.  Federal  and State       7. Maintain right of way access for utility  infrastructure.  Federal  and State       8. Protect the value of existing assets  and contracts and local regulatory  approvals of same.    Federal  and State       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 3 of 13  ELECTRIC   Goals  1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to exercise local accountability and oversight over  matters impacting customer service, programs (such as demand side efficiency and conservation  programs), and rate structure.  2. Preserve/enhance the reliability and security of infrastructure.  3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions  and encourages early voluntary action.  4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills.     Legislative Policy Guidelines                              Venue     Goals     1. Local  Accountability 2.  Reliability  3. GHG  Reduction 4. Cost  Control 1. Advocate goals through Northern California Power  Agency (NCPA), California Municipal Utilities  Association (CMUA), American Public Power  Association (APPA), Transmission Agency of  Northern California (TANC), and Bay Area  Municipal Transmission Group (BAMx) with  support from Palo Alto staff to speak with a  coordinated voice.  Federal  and  State       2. Support NCPA in its continued efforts to  streamline the state regulatory reporting  responsibilities, to eliminate duplicative data and  report submittals to multiple state regulatory  agencies, including the CEC, CARB, and the  California Independent System Operator (CAISO).    State       3. Advocate for legislation/regulations that provide  local control and support for:   cost‐effective clean distributed generation and  cogeneration projects, and standards for  connecting such resources to the local  distribution system;   cost‐effective electric efficiency programs;   implementation of renewable portfolio  standards;   cost‐effective storage integration;   direct access requirements;    smart meters and smart grid design and  implementation, and   public benefit funds (as allowed in AB1890  Federal  and  State       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 4 of 13     1. Local  Accountability 2.  Reliability  3. GHG  Reduction 4. Cost  Control (1996)).  4. Support cap‐and‐trade market designs that:     protect consumers from the exercise of market  power;   allocate allowances that help mitigate impacts  to Palo Alto customers while providing  incentives for utilities to move to lower GHG  emission portfolios;   provide flexible compliance mechanisms such  as banking and borrowing of allowances; and   allocate funds generated from cap‐and‐trade  markets to GHG related activities, not as a  revenue source for state or federal general  funds.  Federal  and  State       5. Support legislation for renewable portfolio  standards that:   promote the 33% goal for the state;   maintain local compliance authority;   allow utilities to pursue low cost alternatives by  utilizing existing transmission system to access  out‐of‐state resources, including use of  Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs);     prevent double jeopardy in the assessment of  penalties for non‐compliance; and   restrict extension of CEC jurisdiction over  Publicly Owned Utilities.  Local  and  State       6. Support/encourage transmission, generation, and  demand‐reduction projects and solutions including  advocating for financing or funding  solutions/options for projects that:   enhance/ensure reliability;   ensure equitable cost allocation (including  protection against imposition of state‐owned  electric contract costs on municipal utility  customers);   improve procurement flexibility (e.g. resource  adequacy rules that ensure reliability and  provide flexibility in meeting operational  requirements or flexibility in meeting State  renewable portfolio standards);   improve market transparency (particularly  transparency of IOU’s transmission and  procurement planning and implementation  activities); and  Local,  State,  and  Federal       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 5 of 13     1. Local  Accountability 2.  Reliability  3. GHG  Reduction 4. Cost  Control  lower the environmental impact on the Bay  Area and the Peninsula.  7. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or  administrative actions on matters impacting costs  or operations of the Western Area Power  Administration such as:     support of Congressional Field Hearings to  explore modernizing flood control strategies,  river regulation and generation strategies at  Central Valley Project (CVP) plants to enhance  generation, water delivery, flood control and  fisheries;   protection of the status of Western Power  Marketing Administration and cost‐based rates;    provisions for preference customers’ first take  at land available with economic potential for  wind farms;    balancing efforts for competing environmental  improvements in rivers and Delta conditions  with water supply and hydropower impacts;  and   Achieving the grid modernization goals of  Secretary Chu’s March 16, 2012 memo without  compromising the primary mission of Western  and recognizing the achievements already  made in California without adding duplicate  costly efforts.  Federal,  State  and  Regional      8. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or  administrative actions on matters relating to  overly burdensome reporting and compliance  requirements established by the North American  Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Federal Energy  Regulatory Commission (FERC) or the Western  Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC).   Federal,  State  and  Regional       9. Support fair and reasonable assessment of grid  reliability established by NERC, WECC, or FERC and  seek Congressional remedies (if needed) for  punitive application of fees and fines.     Federal  and  Regional       10. Work with California Independent System  Operator (CAISO) or through FERC:   to give buyers of renewable intermittent  resources relief from imbalance penalties; and   to promote financial and operational changes  Federal  and  State       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 6 of 13     1. Local  Accountability 2.  Reliability  3. GHG  Reduction 4. Cost  Control that result in timely and accurate settlement  and billing.   11. Monitor cyber security issues to ensure that CPAU,  which currently does not have critical cyber assets,  is not subject to NERC cyber security standards  and support NCPA to protect it and its member  agencies from unnecessary cyber security  regulations.  Federal  and  Regional       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 7 of 13  GAS   Goals  1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to develop their own demand side efficiency and  conservation programs, alternative gas supplies, and rate structure.  2. Increase the security and reliability of the gas supply and transmission infrastructure.  This includes  retaining access to intra‐ and interstate gas transmission systems to reliably serve customers.  3. Support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment.  4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills.     Legislative Policy Guidelines      Venue Goals    1. Local  Authority 2. Reliability of  Infrastructure  3.  Environ ‐ment  4. Cost  Control 1. Advocate most of these goals mainly  through the American Public Gas  Association (APGA) with minor support  from Palo Alto staff.  Primarily  Federal with  minor advocacy  at State level       2. Work with Northern California Power  Agency (NCPA) and California Municipal  Utilities Association (CMUA) to the extent  that the City’s goals as a gas distributor  align with generators’ use of natural gas.  Federal and  State       3. Support increased production/incentives  for renewable gas supplies from in or out of  state.    Federal and  State       4. Advocate for financing or funding for cost‐ effective natural gas efficiency and solar  water heating end uses.  Federal and  State       5. Support market transparency and efforts to  eliminate market manipulation through  reasonable oversight  Federal        6. Support municipal utilities’ ability to enter  into pre‐pay transactions for gas supplies.  Federal        Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 8 of 13    1. Local  Authority 2. Reliability of  Infrastructure  3.  Environ ‐ment  4. Cost  Control 7. Support efforts to improve pipeline safety.   Work with partners to discourage extension  of CPUC regulatory authority over  municipal gas operations.  Oppose  legislative proposals resulting in  unreasonable costs for Palo Alto’s  customers.  Federal and  State         8. Support cap‐and‐trade market designs that:    protect consumers from the exercise of  market power;   allocate allowances that help mitigate  impacts to Palo Alto customers while  providing incentives for natural gas  utilities to move to lower GHG emission  portfolios;   provide flexible compliance mechanisms  such as banking and borrowing of  allowances; and   allocate funds generated from cap‐and‐ trade markets to GHG related activities,  not as a revenue source for state or  federal general funds.  Federal and  State       9. Advocate for the fair application of Clean  Water Act rules and other existing  environmental rules on the practice of  hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” for natural  gas development.  Federal and  State        Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 9 of 13  WASTEWATER  COLLECTION  Goals  1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency  programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the imposition of non‐volumetric  customer meter or infrastructure charges for wastewater collection service.  2. Increase the reliability of the local wastewater collection systems.  3. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable high quality wastewater collection  service at a fair price.  4. Support equal comparisons of wastewater collection systems by regulatory agencies in order to  minimize and reduce onerous, costly and time‐intensive reporting requirements and improve value  and accuracy of information reported to the public.    Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue Goals    1. Local   Authority 2. Reliable  infrastructure  3. Maintain  service  4.Valuable  Reporting 1. Advocate goals through active  participation in the Association of Bay  Area Governments (ABAG).  Local,  Regional  & State       2. Advocate to ensure that legislative  actions regarding the comparison of  wastewater collections systems for future  regulations include the following  requirements:   timely rebuilding of the local  wastewater systems;   maintains the quality of delivered  wastewater collection service;   minimizes any increase in the cost of  wastewater collection service;   creates no additional exposure to  more frequent or severe wastewater  overflows;   supports the existing wastewater   collections systems and their  operation.  Local,  Regional  & State       3. Support provision of  sufficient resources  for ABAG to enable it to advocate for:   environmentally sustainable, reliable  wastewater collection service at a fair  price;   regional comparisons of wastewater  Local and  Regional       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 10 of 13    1. Local   Authority 2. Reliable  infrastructure  3. Maintain  service  4.Valuable  Reporting collection projects for future state  grant funding.  4. Support infrastructure security and  reliability including equitable allocation of  funds for increasing the security of  infrastructure.  Regional,  and State        5. Advocate for funding and local  regulations for wastewater collections  system projects and requirements that  reduce overflows and improve collection  system efficiency.  Regional,  State and  Federal       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 11 of 13  WATER   Goals  1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency  programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the ability to optimize volumetric and  fixed charges to balance the goals of revenue certainty and water use efficiency.  2. Increase the security and reliability of the regional water system owned and operated by the San  Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).  3. Support efficiency and recycled water programs in order to minimize the use of imported supplies.  4. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable supply of high quality water at a  fair price.   Legislative Policy Guidelines         Venue Goals    1. Local   Authority 2.   Reliable  infrastructure  3.  Minimize  imports 4.  Supplies  at fair  cost    1. Advocate goals through active participation in  the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation  Agency (BAWSCA) and California Municipal  Utilities Association (CMUA), with support from  Palo Alto staff for BAWSCA and the San  Francisco Bay Area Regional Water System  Financing Authority (RFA).  Local,  Regional  & State       2. Participate in California Urban Water  Conservation Council (CUWCC) Best  Management Practice (BMP) revisions and  development to ensure that aggressive and cost‐ effective efficiency goals are incorporated and  operating proposals are reasonable, achievable,  and cost‐effective.  State      3. Advocate to ensure that legislative actions  regarding the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and  conveyance system include the following  requirements:   timely rebuilding of the regional water  system;   maintains the quality of delivered water;   minimizes any increase in the cost of water;   creates no additional exposure to more  frequent or severe water shortages;   supports the existing water system and its  Local,  Regional  & State       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 12 of 13    1. Local   Authority 2.   Reliable  infrastructure  3.  Minimize  imports 4.  Supplies  at fair  cost    operation.   4. Advocate for interpretations or implementation  of Water Code provisions (such as those enacted  by AB 1823 (2002), AB 2058 (2002) and SB 1870  (2002)) that maintain or reinforce the authorities  and protections available to the City and  BAWSCA members outside of San Francisco.  Local,  Regional  and  State       5. Support provision of sufficient resources for  BAWSCA to enable it to advocate for:   an environmentally sustainable, reliable  supply of high quality water at a fair price;   preservation of Palo Alto’s existing  contractual water allocation and  transportation rights on the SFPUC Hetch  Hetchy system;   regional planning for conservation, recycled  water, and other water supply projects.  Local  and  Regional         6. Advocate for:   actions that preserve Palo Alto’s existing  contractual rights    supporting actions that preserve local  control over water use and limit  encroachment from outside jurisdictions  Local  and  Regional       7. Support infrastructure security and reliability  including an interconnection between the  SCVWD West Pipeline with the SFPUC’s Bay  Division Pipelines 3 and 4.  Regional  and  State        8. Support notification requirements that aid  residents/customers but do not inflict undue or  unobtainable requirements on the utility.   State       9. Support local control of public benefit funds  funding levels and program design.  State       10. Support beneficiary pays methodologies to  prevent taxes or fees, in particular those  imposed on SFPUC customers, to fund  infrastructure improvements and costs of other  water sources such as the Delta.    State      11. Advocate for financing or funding for water  conservation programs and recycled water  projects that meet end‐use needs and conserve  State,  Regional  and       Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2013 Exhibit 2 to Attachment A     Page 13 of 13    1. Local   Authority 2.   Reliable  infrastructure  3.  Minimize  imports 4.  Supplies  at fair  cost    potable water and oppose legislation that would  reduce such funding.   Federal 12. Support infrastructure security and reliability  that includes equitable allocation of funds for  increasing the security of infrastructure and that  protects the City from unnecessary regulations.  Local,  State,  and  Federal       Exhibit 3 to Attachment A 1 Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) Objectives, Strategies and Implementation Plan Approved March 7, 2011 (Resolution No. 9152) Modified by Council March 19, 2012 (Staff Report No. 2581) Modified by Council April 16, 2012 (Staff Report No. 2710) LEAP Objectives: 1. Meet customer electricity needs through the acquisition of least total cost energy and demand resources including an assessment of the environmental costs and benefits 2. Manage supply portfolio cost uncertainty to meet rate and reserve objectives. 3. Enhance supply reliability to meet City and customer needs by pursuing opportunities including transmission system upgrades and local generation. LEAP Strategies and Implementation Plan Steps: 1. Resource Acquisition – Pursue the least total cost resources including an assessment of environmental costs and benefits to meet the City’s needs in the long term by: a. Evaluating each potential resource on an equal basis by evaluating rate impacts and establishing costs and values for location, time of day and year, carbon, value of renewable supplies and any secondary benefits attributed to the resource; and b. Including all resources – conventional energy, local and remote renewable energy supplies, energy efficiency, cogeneration, and demand reduction – in the evaluation. Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #1 – Resource Acquisition Estimated Completion 1. Adjust planning and portfolio models to include an integrated and least cost planning perspective which evaluates demand and supply side resources in an integrated manner and includes time of delivery, locational and environmental costs and benefits. Dec. 2010 2. Evaluate the impacts of energy efficiency, demand reductions and electric vehicle penetration in Palo Alto in the annual development of the electric load forecast. Dec. 2010 2. Electric Energy Efficiency and Demand Reduction – Fund programs that maximize the deployment of cost-effective, reliable and feasible energy efficiency and demand reduction opportunities as the highest priority resources by: a. Every three years, preparing a ten-year energy efficiency plan that identifies all cost- effective energy efficiency opportunities; b. Using the cost of long-term renewable energy resources adjusted for time of day factors and location as the avoided cost when evaluating cost effectiveness of energy efficiency measures; c. Designing and making energy efficiency programs available to all customers; and Exhibit 3 to Attachment A 2 d. Considering the impacts (costs, benefits and GHG emissions) of substituting electricity-using appliances for natural gas-using appliances and vice versa in the ten- year energy efficiency plan. Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #2 – Electric Energy Efficiency and Demand Reduction Estimated Completion 3. Provide quarterly updates on electric efficiency program achievements including tracking against 10-Year Energy Efficiency goals to the UAC and annual updates to the City Council. quarterly 4. Develop Energy Efficiency Implementation Plan for the 2010 10-Year Electric EE Plan addressing certain items identified in the May 2010 Council Colleagues Memo and identification of resources and funding needed to achieve EE goals. Apr. 2011 5. Evaluate fuel switching energy efficiency measures and include them, if cost- effective, in the Electric and Gas EE Implementation Plans. Feb. 2011 6. Develop a pilot Demand Response Program for large commercial industrial customers for implementation in summer 2011. Apr. 2011 7. Assess the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of using current and potential thermal energy storage (TES) systems to shift load from on-peak periods to off-peak periods, for use in a demand response program, or for meeting any energy storage needs. Coordinate with task 21 to develop targets, if appropriate. Sep. 2011 3. Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) – Reduce the carbon intensity of the electric portfolio by acquiring renewable energy supplies by: a. Pursuing a minimum level of renewable purchases of at least 33% of retail sales by 2015 with the following attributes: i. The contracts for investment in renewable resources shall not exceed 30 years in term. ii. Pursue only renewable resources deemed to be eligible by the California Energy Commission (CEC). iii. Evaluate use of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) to meet RPS. b. Ensuring that the retail rate impact for renewable purchases does not exceed 0.5 ¢/kWh on average; and c. Performing an ongoing evaluation of the Palo Alto Clean Local Energy Accessible Now (CLEAN) program. Proposed Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #3 – Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Estimated Completion 8. Fully integrate the effects on energy efficiency in the long-term electric load forecast. Nov. 2010 9. Evaluate the merits of implementing a feed-in-tariff (FIT) and the potential to meet RPS goals through local renewable resources. Jan. 2011 Exhibit 3 to Attachment A 3 Proposed Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #3 – Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Estimated Completion 10. Seek UAC recommendation and Council approval of the policy elements of a FIT to encourage local renewable resource projects. May 2011 11. Continue working with NCPA to identify opportunities, including joint- ownership, for developing qualifying renewable resources. On-going 12. Evaluate the use of renewable energy credits (REC) to meet a portion of the City’s RPS goal and/or greenhouse gas emission reduction goals and monitor the regulations and requirements regarding the use of RECs to meet RPS goals. On-going 13. Evaluate a proposed geothermal project being considered by NCPA, including a pre-pay option and the benefit, costs, and risks of a pre-pay structure. June 2011 14. Conduct a Request for Proposal for eligible renewable resources including RECs and evaluate alternative renewable resource technologies and contracting mechanisms. RFP in June 2011 4. Local Generation – Promote and facilitate the deployment of cost-effective local resources by: a. Using the renewable market price referent (MPR) adjusted for time of day factors and location as the avoided cost when evaluating cost effectiveness of local resources; b. Considering energy delivery cost uncertainty and strategic value options when evaluating opportunities; c. Evaluating a Feed-in-Tariff to promote locally sited renewable resources; d. Evaluating cost-effective energy storage resources; and e. Evaluating the feasibility of developing a 25 to 50 MW generating facility connect to the City’s distribution system. Proposed Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #4 – Local Generation Estimated Completion 15. Provide an update of past local generation feasibility studies and actions to UAC and Council Dec. 2010 16. Assess the potential for and feasibility of small local distributed and non- distributed, renewable and cogeneration projects, including using a FIT to encourage these projects. Jan. 2011 17. Assess the potential, benefits and costs of developing and/or joint ownership of a 25 to 50 MW gas-fired power plant located in or near Palo Alto to meet load, reliability and local capacity needs. Jun. 2011 18. Evaluate the City’s PLUG-In Program to encourage cogeneration including rules, regulations, and buy back rates and recommend modifications as needed. Dec. 2011 Exhibit 3 to Attachment A 4 Proposed Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #4 – Local Generation Estimated Completion 19. Following receiving Council direction from Implementation Plan Initiative #10, develop a FIT proposal including rate, rules, regulations, standard contract form and limits. To be determined 20. Assess the economics and potential of the anaerobic digester as a local generation resource for CPAU Sep. 2011 21. Assess the need for and value of energy storage to support local renewable distributed generation resources. Determine any appropriate energy storage targets to be achieved by December 31, 2016, and December 31, 2021. Report back to the Council regarding what procurement targets, if any, are deemed to be appropriate so that the Council may adopt such procurement targets, if determined to be appropriate, by October 1, 2014. Jun. 2012 5. Climate Protection – Reduce the electric portfolio’s carbon intensity by: a. Supporting the City municipal government’s climate protection goals; b. Promoting the use of technologies (e.g. incentives for cogeneration systems, promotion of EVs, in-home energy displays) and programs that will reduce the community’s carbon footprint at a cost of up to the City’s value of carbon; c. Continuing to offer a renewable resource-based retail rate for all customers who want to voluntarily select an increased content of non-hydro renewable energy; and. d. Evaluating quantitative goals for possible future implementation. Proposed Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #5 – Climate Protection Estimated Completion 22. Promote the City’s Plug-in program to encourage development of cogeneration systems. On-going 23. Analyze electric vehicle (EV) charging patterns and evaluate rates to incent nighttime EV charging. Jun. 2011 24. Meet AB32 mandated annual reporting requirements to California Air Resources Board on annual volumes of electricity purchases by resource. Annually, next in Jun. 2011 25. Track and report annually on 6 major greenhouse gas emissions (CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, HFCs, PFCs) for all of the City’s municipal operations and calculate electric portfolio’s overall emissions coefficients (lbs of CO2, CH4, and N2O per MWh of purchases). Annually, next in Sep. 2011 26. Evaluate the costs, benefits and impacts of the implementation of an electric portfolio carbon neutral policy and the setting of quantitative goals (e.g. carbon intensity, total GHG emissions). Jan. 2012 27. Evaluate PaloAltoGreen program design and recommend modifications, as appropriate, including constructing PaloAltoGreen to assist in meeting Renewable Portfolio Standard goals. Jun. 2012 Exhibit 3 to Attachment A 5 6. Hydro Resource Management – Actively monitor and manage cost uncertainty related to variations in hydroelectric supply and maximize value of hydro resources by: a. Planning for an average hydro year on a long-term basis; b. Utilizing cost effective hydro resource management products; and c. Implementing opportunities to maximize benefits and reduce costs of the Western Base Resource and Calaveras hydroelectric resources. Proposed Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #6 – Hydro Resource Management Estimated Completion 28. Evaluate potential rate adjustment mechanisms that would adjust electric rates based on hydrologic year type and develop a recommendation for a rate. Apr. 2011 29. Assess the value related to Palo Alto’s participation in the CAISO’s Metered Subsystem Agreement and the use of the Calaveras hydroelectric project for load following. On-going 30. Identify long-term opportunities to maximize the value of the Calaveras hydroelectric project as an energy storage resource. On-going 31. Work with NCPA to seek opportunities to increase the efficiency of the Calaveras hydroelectric project and implement operational value maximizing strategies. On-going 7. Market Price Exposure Management – Actively monitor and manage operational, counterparty and wholesale energy price risk in the short-term (up to three to five years) by: a. Maintaining an adequate pool of creditworthy suppliers; and b. Diversifying supply purchases across commitment date, start date, duration, suppliers and pricing terms in alignment with rate stability objectives and reserve guideline. Proposed Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #7 – Market Price Exposure Management Estimated Completion 32. Evaluate a block purchase of up to 25 MW to meet base load needs for Jan- Mar and Nov-Dec for a term of up to 5 years. Feb. 2011 33. Conduct an RFP for new electric master agreement counterparties. Dec. 2011 34. Explore opportunities with NCPA, other municipal utilities and/or third party suppliers to reduce scheduling and/or operating costs. On-going 35. Continue to implement a 3-year laddering strategy to manage market price uncertainty. On-going 8. Transmission and Reliability – Pursue the reliability of supply at fair and reasonable transmission and delivery costs by: a. Actively participating through collaborative efforts with other entities, in local, regional, statewide and federal regulatory and legislative forums; Exhibit 3 to Attachment A 6 b. Participating in transmission and reliability market design forums to ensure that adopted market designs result in adequate reliability, workably competitive markets and equitable cost allocation; c. Evaluating interconnection options to the City to increase service reliability and lower delivery costs; and d. Exploring transmission opportunities and strategies to meet long-term renewable portfolio objectives beyond 2020. Proposed Implementation Plan Items for Strategy #8 – Transmission and Reliability Estimated Completion 36. Investigate transmission connection voltage upgrade from 115 to 230 kV, and the potential for a transmission reliability connection to west side. On-going 37. Explore transmission opportunities and strategies to meet long-term renewable portfolio objectives beyond 2020. On-going 38. Evaluate joint efforts for power plant ownership opportunities or long-term agreements to meet the City’s Resource Adequacy Program requirements. On-going Exhibit 4 to Attachment A 1 Gas Utility Long-term Plan (GULP) Objectives, Strategies and Implementation Plan Approved by Council on April 23, 2012 (Staff Report 2552 – Resolution 9244) GULP Objectives: 1. Market price transparency – Pass a market supply cost signal through to customers. 2. Supply Cost Management – Lower delivered gas cost over the long term. 3. Energy Efficiency – Ensure the deployment of all feasible, reliable, cost-effective energy efficiency measures. 4. Climate Protection – Reduce the carbon intensity of the gas portfolio in accordance with the Climate Protection Plan. 5. Parity with PG&E – At a reasonable cost, protect the City’s interests and maintain access to transportation on par with PG&E’s core customers. GULP Strategies: 1. Pass a market supply cost signal through to customers by: a. Purchasing natural gas at monthly and daily market index prices; and b. Changing gas supply rates monthly to reflect market prices. 2. Lower delivered gas cost over the long term by: a. Acquiring pipeline assets that yield supply costs below market and meet operational needs; b. Taking advantage of the City’s low cost of capital to acquire gas supply and assets; and c. Optimizing existing assets. 3. Ensure the deployment of all feasible, reliable, cost-effective energy efficiency measures by: a. Developing and implementing a ten-year gas efficiency plan every three years that includes a reasonable carbon price premium for traditional gas supplies; and b. Considering the impacts (cost, benefits, and GHG emissions) of substituting electricity-using appliances for gas-using appliances and vice versa in the ten-year gas efficiency plan. 4. Reduce the carbon intensity of the gas portfolio in accordance with the Climate Protection Plan by: a. Designing and implementing a voluntary retail program using reasonably priced non- fossil fuel gas resources; and b. Purchasing non-fossil fuel gas for the portfolio as long as it can be done with no rate impact. 5. At a reasonable cost, protect the City’s interests and maintain access to transportation on par with PG&E’s core customers by: a. Participating in the regulatory and legislative arenas when the potential impact on the City is aligned with the cost to intervene and the probability of success; Exhibit 4 to Attachment A 2 a. Negotiating with PG&E for fair access to transportation and storage; and b. Exploring potential joint action with other public agencies. GULP Implementation Plan: 1. Transition to market price-based, monthly-adjusted gas supply rates by: a. Developing a new purchasing plan to be approved by the Director of Utilities; b. Designing a new monthly-adjusted gas supply rate; c. Revising the reserve guidelines for Council approval; and d. Conducting customer communication and outreach. 2. Pursue below-market assets available through the Gas Transportation and Storage Settlement by: a. Evaluating the pipeline capacity reservation options available; and b. Contracting with PG&E for any pipeline capacity with an estimated cost below the forecasted market value. 3. Pursue opportunities for natural gas prepay transactions by: a. Hiring a consultant to help staff with: i. Identifying any internal policy changes needed including the policy on the use of financial instruments; ii. Identifying system and internal processes required; iii. Identifying opportunities; and iv. Evaluating opportunities and quantifying the benefits and costs; and b. Seeking UAC recommendation and Council approval regarding whether to proceed with a gas prepay transaction. 4. Develop an implementation plan to meet the gas efficiency targets by summer 2011 including the: a. Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of substituting gas-using appliance for electric- using appliances and vice versa and the greenhouse gas impacts of such substitutions; and b. Incorporation of any cost-effective substitution measures in the implementation plan to meet the gas efficiency targets. 5. Track and report progress against adopted gas efficiency goals by: a. Providing quarterly updates on the gas efficiency program achievements to the UAC; and b. Providing annual updates on gas efficiency program achievements to the UAC and the City Council. 6. Continue evaluating new gas efficiency technologies and undertake pilot studies where appropriate. 7. Pursue reasonably priced non-fossil gas for a voluntary program through NGPP by: a. Reviewing the due diligence report to be provided to NGPP participants by the end of October 2010; and b. Based on the results, recommending whether to continue participating in the projects. Exhibit 5 to Attachment A 1 Water Integrated Resource Plan Guidelines Approved by the City Council on December 8, 2003 (CMR:547:03) Guideline 1 – Preserve and enhance SFPUC supplies: With respect to the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) primary water supply source, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), continue to actively participate in the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) to assist in achieving BAWSCA’s stated goal: “A reliable supply of water, with high quality, and at a fair price.” Objectives in support of that overall goal include: A. That the regional water system gets rebuilt cost-effectively and that BAWSCA monitor implementation of AB 1823 – San Francisco should safeguard the water system against damage from earthquakes and other foreseeable hazards. BAWSCA will monitor progress on the system repairs and on completing the requirements of the legislation that the BAWSCA agencies supported to oblige San Francisco to repair and rebuild the regional system. B. That the cost of improvements is fairly allocated – San Francisco should commit to maintaining cost-based pricing, with the costs of the wholesale water system shared between the City and its wholesale customers based on their proportionate share. C. That future water needs can be met – San Francisco must evaluate the ability of the regional system to meet future supply and capacity requirements and must use the BAWSCA agencies’ long-term water demand forecasts as the basis for regional water demand projections. D. That there are adequate supplies during droughts – San Francisco should arrange back-up supplies for dry years and should “drought proof” the entire service area, not just San Francisco itself. If rationing becomes necessary, San Francisco should use a system that allocates available water between San Francisco and wholesale customers in a way that (1) is fair and (2) avoids penalizing long-term conservation efforts and/or development of alternative supplies, such as recycled water. E. That communities prepare for potential water outages – San Francisco should coordinate with the BAWSCA agencies to develop a crisis management plan. F. That agencies implement cost-effective water conservation activities – San Francisco should provide agencies enough information so that they can prepare for possible outages, including the provision of conservation programs for their communities. BAWSCA can act as coordinator for these programs to improve the cost- effectiveness of agencies offering such programs. Exhibit 5 to Attachment A 2 G. That water received must meet drinking water standards – San Francisco should continue to protect the purity of Hetch Hetchy water and commit to provide its wholesale customers with water that meets EPA and California drinking water standards. H. That the Master Contract is properly implemented and a new Master Contract is in place prior to 2009 – San Francisco should commit to maintaining cost-based pricing, with the costs of the wholesale water system shared between the City and its wholesale customers based on their proportionate share. I. That there is ongoing support of efforts to protect health, safety and economic well being of the water customers and communities – BAWSCA should maintain the support of the many allies who supported the legislative effort to ensure San Francisco repairs, rebuilds, and maintains the regional system. Guideline 2 – Advocate for an interconnection between SFPUC and the District: Work with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) and the SFPUC to pursue the extension of the District’s West Pipeline to an interconnection with the SFPUC Bay Division Pipelines 3&4. Continue to re-evaluate the attractiveness of a connection to an extension of the District’s West Pipeline. Guideline 3 – Actively participate in development of cost-effective regional recycled water plans: Re-initiate discussions with the owners of the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (PARWQCP) on recycled water development. In concert with the PARWQCP owners, conduct a new feasibility study for recycled water development. Since the feasibility of a recycled water system depends upon sufficient end-user interest, determine how much water Stanford and the Stanford Research Park would take. Guideline 4 – Focus water DSM programs to comply with BMPs: Continue implementation of water efficiency programs with the primary focus to achieve compliance with the Best Management Practices (BMPs) promoted by the California Urban Water Conservation Coalition. Guideline 5 – Maintain emergency water conservation measures to be activated in case of droughts: Review, retain, and prioritize CPAU’s emergency water conservation measures that would be put into place in a drought time emergency. Guideline 6 – Retain groundwater supply options in case of changed future conditions: Using groundwater on a continuous basis does not appear to be attractive at this time due to the availability of adequate, high quality supplies from the SFPUC in normal years. However, SFPUC supplies are not adequate in drought years and circumstances could change in the future such that groundwater supplies could become an attractive, cost-effective option. Examples of changing circumstances could be that the amount of water available to CPAU from the SFPUC for the long-term is reduced. This could occur if regulations or legislation require additional water to be made available to the Tuolumne River fisheries. In addition, in the future Exhibit 5 to Attachment A 3 allocations or entitlements to SFPUC water may be developed. If those allocations are based on the dry-year yield of the system, allocations to all the users of the system, including CPAU, could be well below their current and projected future needs. CPAU should retain the option of using groundwater in amounts that would not result in land surface subsidence, saltwater intrusion, or migration of contaminated plumes. Guideline 7 – Survey community to determine its preferences regarding the best water resource portfolio: Seek feedback from all classes of water customers on the question of whether to use groundwater during drought to improve drought year supply reliability. At the same time, seek feedback on the appropriate level of water treatment for groundwater if it were to be used in droughts. Survey all classes of water customers to determine their preferences as to the appropriate balance between cost, quality, reliability, and environmental impact. Note: WIRP Guidelines approved with the proviso that when determining the economic feasibility of alternative water sources relative to SFPUC water, consideration will be given to the possibility that SFPUC water may have a fixed cost component independent of usage, which may be unavoidable when SFPUC water use is reduced. Exhibit 6 to Attachment A 1 Adopted by City Council on March 4, 2013 (Staff Report 3550) City of Palo Alto Utilities Electric Supply Portfolio Carbon Neutral Plan 1. Carbon Neutral Definition A carbon neutral electric supply portfolio will demonstrate annual net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, measured at the Citygate1, in accordance with The Climate Registry’s Electric Power Sector protocol for GHG emissions measurement and reporting. 2. Carbon Neutral Plan Objective Reduce the City of Palo Alto’s overall community GHG emissions by achieving carbon neutrality for the Electric Supply Portfolio starting in calendar year 2013 within an annual rate impact not to exceed 0.15 cents per kilowatt-hour (₵/kWh) primarily through the: 1) engagement of customers to increase energy efficiency; 2) expansion of long-term renewable resource commitments; 3) promotion of local renewable resources; 4) continued reliance on existing hydroelectric resources; and 5) meeting short-term balancing requirements and/or neutralizing residual carbon through the use of short-term purchases of renewable resources and/or renewable energy certificates (RECs). 3. Resource Strategies a. Energy Efficiency i. Continue to pursue energy efficiency strategies as identified in the Council- approved ten-year Energy Efficiency Plan. b. Long-term Renewable Resources i. Continue to pursue the City’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) goal to purchase renewable energy to supply at least 33% of retail sales by 2015 while ensuring that the retail rate impact of these purchases does not exceed 0.5₵/kWh. ii. Continue to pursue local renewable resources through the Palo Alto CLEAN and PV Partners programs. iii. Pursue additional RPS-eligible, long-term renewable resources (beyond the RPS goals) to achieve a target of 100% carbon-free resources based on average year hydroelectric generation. c. Short-term Renewable Resources and Renewable Energy Certificates i. For calendar years 2013 through 2016, procure short-term renewables, if the price is comparable to that of an un-bundled REC; 1 Citygate is the location of the City’s main meter where the City interconnects to the Pacific Gas and Electric transmission system. Emissions associated with of the output of the locally sited fossil gas fired combustions units (COBUG), while not measured at Citygate, will be neutralized. Exhibit 6 to Attachment A 2 ii. For calendar years 2013 through 2016, procure RPS-eligible, un-bundled RECs as needed to achieve carbon neutrality based on actual load and resources; iii. Neutralize anthropogenic GHG emissions associated with renewable resources with unbundled-RECs, which may or may not be RPS-eligible. d. Banking and Truing Up i. In the event that there are surplus renewables beyond the load in a particular year, bank as many RECs as allowable under the TCR EPS protocol from qualifying renewables from that year to minimize the need for purchasing RECs in subsequent years. ii. Neutralize emissions associated with market purchases resulting from deviations between expected and actual load and renewable and hydroelectric generation resources with unbundled-RECs, which may or may not be RPS-eligible. 4. Hydroelectric Resources a. Continue to preserve and advocate for existing carbon-neutral hydroelectric generation resources that provide approximately 50% of average year resource needs. b. Plan for and acquire carbon neutral resources assuming average hydroelectric conditions going forward. c. Under adverse hydroelectric conditions, procure unbundled-RECs, which may or may not be RPS-eligible, to achieve carbon neutrality up to the 0.15₵/kWh rate impact limit and seek Council direction if carbon neutrality cannot be achieved within the rate impact limit. d. Under favorable hydroelectric conditions, where carbon neutral resources are expected to be surplus to needs, even after allowable banking, then pursue selling short-term renewable energy, or the renewable attributes, associated with one or more carbon- neutral resources in the portfolio. 5. Financial and Rate Payer Impacts a. In addition to the RPS annual rate impact limit of 0.5₵/kWh, the cost of achieving carbon neutrality shall not exceed 0.15₵/kWh based on an average hydro year. b. Revenues collected from surplus energy sales related to hydroelectric resources under favorable conditions (e.g. wet years), will be maintained within reserves to adjust for the cost of achieving carbon neutrality under adverse hydroelectric years. c. To the extent available and allowable, revenues from the auction of cap-and-trade allowances may be used to fund resources acquired to meet the carbon neutrality goals. 6. Reporting and Communication a. Develop a communication plan for stakeholders to inform them of the City’s efforts towards achieving a carbon neutral electric supply. b. Submit an annual, verified report of the carbon content of the electric supply portfolio to The Climate Registry. c. Provide customers a report of the electric supply portfolio’s carbon content to supplement the mandated Power Content Label. Exhibit 6 to Attachment A 3 d. Inform large commercial and/or corporate customers of the City’s carbon neutral portfolio and its relevance to their individual corporate sustainability goals. 7. Implementation Plan The tasks that need to be completed in the next two years pending Council approval of the Carbon Neutral Plan in February 2013 are listed in the table below. Item Timeframe 1. Modify electric supply portfolio models and Energy Risk Management Policies, Guidelines and Procedures to account for Carbon Neutral objectives, balancing, banking of renewable attributes, reporting and financial impacts. By April 2013 2. Modify the Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) to include the carbon neutral objective By June 2013 3. Develop communication plan to inform customers and stakeholders of Carbon Neutral Plan and efforts. February to April 2013 4. Based on response to the Fall 2012 request for proposals, seek approval of new renewable power purchase agreements to meet the City’s RPS up to approximately 100% of the long-term resource needs in average hydro years. December 2012 to June 2013 5. Determine resource needs for CY 2013 through CY 2016 and develop plan to acquire short-term renewable resources. By June 2013 6. Determine long-term renewable purchase volumes for beyond CY 2016 and develop plan to acquire long-term renewable resources. By September 2013 7. Procure RECs as needed to neutralize carbon emissions based on actual load and resources for CY 2013. By May 2014 8. Along with annual Power Content Label, produce and report to customers the carbon intensity of the electric supply portfolio. May/June 2014 and annually thereafter 9. Produce and submit Electric Power Sector (EPS) and Local Governments Operation Protocol (LGOP) reports to The Climate Registry (TCR) for CY 2013. July and October 2014 and annually thereafter 10. Get independent verification of TCR reports and submit audited reports to TCR. By December 2014 and annually thereafter 11. Redesign the PaloAltoGreen program according to Council direction. By December 2013