Common use of SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS Clause in Contracts

SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. Appendix K to PG&E’s 2009 solicitation protocol states various attributes of a renewable project regarding which Offers are scored to arrive at a rating for support of RPS Goals. Among these is “environmental stewardship”, which is identified in the CPUC’s Decision 00-00-000 as one of a few designated “qualitative attributes” that the Decision allowed the IOUs to use as the basis for including Offers on a short list, subject to (1) the Offer being within reasonable price proximity to others selected and (2) support from the utility’s PRG prior to elevation.20 In the 2009 RFO, PG&E’s administration of its methodology to exclude Offers that pose serious environmental concerns represents the contrapositive of the CPUC’s specific thinking in that Decision: instead of using this element of the RPS Goals criterion to elevate a lower-valued but uniquely environmentally beneficial Offer onto the short list, PG&E is using the qualitative attribute to demote higher-valued but environmentally detrimental projects from the short list. In the interest of transparency of the solicitation, Xxxxxx would recommend that future solicitation materials clarify that, within the components that make up the RPS Goals evaluation criterion, the specific review of environmental stewardship attributes can serve as the basis for rejection of Offers that raise serious concerns.

SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. Appendix K to PG&E’s 2009 solicitation protocol states various attributes of a renewable project regarding which Offers are scored to arrive at a rating for support of RPS Goals. Among these is “environmental stewardship”, which is identified in the CPUC’s Decision 00-00-000 as one of a few designated “qualitative attributes” that the Decision allowed the IOUs to use as the basis for including Offers on a short list, subject to (1) the Offer being within reasonable price proximity to others selected and (2) support from the utility’s PRG prior to elevation.20 elevation.21 In the 2009 RFO, PG&E’s administration of its methodology to exclude Offers that pose serious environmental concerns represents the contrapositive of the CPUC’s specific thinking in that Decision: instead of using this element of the RPS Goals criterion to elevate a lower-valued but uniquely environmentally beneficial Offer onto the short list, PG&E is using the qualitative attribute to demote higher-valued but environmentally detrimental projects from the short list. In the interest of transparency of the solicitation, Xxxxxx would recommend that future solicitation materials clarify that, within the components that make up the RPS Goals evaluation criterion, the specific review of environmental stewardship attributes can serve as the basis for rejection of Offers that raise serious concerns.