8. Assignment of Proceeding
Timothy Alan Simon is the assigned Commissioner and Timothy Kenney is the assigned Administrative Law Judge in this proceeding.
1. General Order 95 applies to communication infrastructure providers.
2. Communication infrastructure providers may need additional guidance in performing inspections of overhead facilities installed on electric infrastructure equipment and structures.
3. By requiring certain preventative actions be taken by communication infrastructure providers, we are promoting public safety in high fire threat areas.
4. Corrective action is critical to achieve our goal of fire prevention and documentation is needed to verify adequate inspections and corrective actions.
5. Minor revisions to Rule 12 of General Order 95 are needed to clarify the applicability of this general order. In phase 2 of this proceeding, we will continue to evaluate whether further revisions to Rule 12 are needed.
6. The revisions to Rule 12 of General Order 95 that we adopt today do not rely on any findings that communication facilities cause or contribute to fires.
7. The revisions to Rule 12 of General Order 95 clarify that General Order 95 includes communication facilities.
8. The addition of a new rule, Rule 18, adopted today will, in certain circumstances, require significant changes to the reporting, notification, and repair procedures used by those companies that currently have no such procedures in place. This investment is required to address public safety concerns. These new requirements will not impose excessive costs and will improve fire safety.
9. Without the documentation required by Rule 18 of General Order 95, we lack critical evidence to ensure safety hazards are promptly corrected. Such actions are essential to improving fire safety in California before the upcoming 2009 fall fire season.
10. Our revised rules and ordering paragraphs reference the Fire Threat Map published by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's Fire Resources Assessment Program as a tool to identify designated "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" in Southern California.
11. Ordering Paragraph 2 serves to clarify the applicability of the Fire Threat Map and provides a sufficient basis for establishing which areas constitute "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones".
12. When using the Fire Threat Map, entities subject to our jurisdiction are responsible for determining what the accepted best safety practices are given local conditions.
13. Revisions to General Order 95 are needed to emphasize the existing obligation to cooperate with Commission staff investigations and to preserve evidence. These revisions are reflected in a new rule, Rule 19.
14. To the extent that Rule 19 will assist CPSD in investigating fires and enhance cooperation during staff investigations, Rule 19 will contribute to improved public safety in the upcoming fall fire season in Southern California.
15. In applying Rule 35 of General Order 95, ambiguity exists around what constitutes a "tree." The term "vegetation management" is a commonly used term in the industry and, in the context of Rule 35, is not ambiguous.
16. Interim revisions to Appendix E of General Order 95 to increase the minimum clearance at the time of trim for "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" are needed to improve fire safety in Southern California before the upcoming 2009 fall fire season.
17. Interim revisions to Rule 37 at Table 1 of General Order 95 are needed to expand the minimum radial vegetation clearances for certain electric lines in high fire risk areas in Southern California. The expansion of these clearances promotes our goal in phase 1 of reducing risks of fires in certain areas before the upcoming 2009 fall fire season and serves to align the minimum clearances set forth in General Order 95 with those provided for in California Public Resource Code § 4293.
18. In considering revisions to Rule 37 at Table 1 of General Order 95, generally, cultivated actively managed orchards pose less of a fire hazard than other areas within the "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" in Southern California.
19. An exemption from the increased clearances in Rule 37 at Table 1 of General Order 95 for fruit, nut or citrus tree orchards that are plowed or cultivated may result is greater attention to more vulnerable areas and thereby further our goal of phase 1 of this proceeding to reduce fire hazards before the 2009 fall fire season.
20. Modifications to Rule 38 (Table 2) of General Order 95 are needed to clarify the existing requirement of taking known local conditions into account when designing, constructing, and maintaining facilities, specifically conductor separation, in areas subject to high winds. This modification is incorporated into a new footnote, footnote (zz), to Rule 38 (Table 2).
21. The modifications to Rule 38 (Table 2) of General Order 95 simply clarify the rule. Therefore, we do not limit its application to only those areas in "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" in Southern California. The language we adopt today will apply on a statewide basis.
22. Overloaded poles may break and thereby contribute to increased fire hazards. Added Rule 44.2 of General Order 95 is needed to address issues related to pole overloading. Statewide application of these revisions is preferable to limiting the application to "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" in Southern California to ensure consistency and due to the public safety hazards associated with pole overloading.
23. Fire hazards could be reduced by increasing the current frequency of patrol inspections in rural areas that lie within "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" in Southern California. Increased patrols require revisions to General Order 165. The costs associated with increase patrols will be addressed in phase 2.
24. We find that each cost-of-service regulated utility is entitled to recover reasonable costs prudently incurred to comply with the measures adopted today. Small local exchange carriers which are on cost-of-service regulation will operate under the same cost recovery framework as electric companies.
25. Regarding those utilities with deregulated rates, including incumbent local exchange carriers, we decline to adopt any mechanisms for recovery of costs associated with today's rule changes, as telecommunications companies with rate flexibility may charge different rates to recover costs without our approval. To the extent that a telecommunications company with rate flexibility seeks to place a line-item on its bill to recover such costs, however, it must not falsely imply that such charge is CPUC-mandated or approved. Our decision recognizes the fact that certain utilities operate under cost-of-service ratemaking, while others have authority to charge market-based rates.
26. We direct all entities subject to the revised rules and adopted ordering paragraphs to take all reasonable measures to immediately begin implementation of these directives.
1. Phase 1 of this proceeding primarily addresses measures to reduce fire hazards in California before the 2009 fall fire season.
2. With regard to CEQA, we find that CEQA does not apply to the measures adopted today. The measures do not require any activity that would be considered a project under CEQA.
3. Under Pub. Util. Code §§ 8002, 8037, and 8056, the Commission's jurisdiction extends to publicly-owned utilities for the limited purpose of adopting and enforcing rules governing electric transmission and distribution facilities to protect the safety of employees and the general public.
4. As set forth in Ordering Paragraph 1, we find it reasonable to require communication infrastructure providers take specific inspection and corrective actions within the next few months. The ordering paragraph serves to temporarily supplement General Order 95 and will remain in effect until we issue a decision in phase 2 of this proceeding. In phase 2, the Commission may decide to incorporate all or part of this ordering paragraph into final rules adopted at that time.
5. All terms used in Ordering Paragraph 1 shall be defined consistent with the terms set forth in General Order 95.
6. To reduce fire hazards, it is reasonable to adopt revisions to Rule 12 of General Order 95 to clarify that General Order 95 includes communication facilities.
7. It is reasonable to find that the addition of Rule 18 to General Order 95 will reduce fire hazards by establishing an auditable utility maintenance program, providing a framework for notification of safety hazards involving equipment owned by one company and discovered by another company, and prioritizing corrective actions for General Order 95
8. It is reasonable to find that the addition of Rule 18 to General Order 95 will reduce fire hazards by immediately improving documentation of maintenance, repairs, and inspections of overhead lines. We make no findings or conclusions as to the causation of fires.
9. Ordering Paragraph 2 clarifies the use of the Fire Threat Map to determine "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" in Southern California.
10. It is reasonable to find that Rule 19 of General Order 95 will assist CPSD in investigating fires and enhance cooperation during staff investigations and thereby contribute to improved public safety in the upcoming fall fire season in California.
11. To address confusion over what type of vegetation constitutes a "tree," it is reasonable to adopt revisions to Rule 35 of General Order 95 to change existing references to "tree trimming" to "vegetation management."
12. To reduce fire hazards, it is reasonable to adopt interim revisions to Appendix E to General Order 95 that increase the minimum clearance for vegetation established at the time of trim for "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" in Southern California. We adopt these revisions as an interim measure pending further review of cost data.
13. It is reasonable to adopt interim revisions to Rule 37 at Table 1 of General Order 95 to expand the minimum vegetation clearances for certain electric lines in high fire risk areas in Southern California.
14. It is reasonable to adopt revisions to clearances at Table 1 in Rule 37 of General Order 95 to further our goal of phase 1 of this proceeding to reduce fire hazards before the 2009 fall fire season.
15. To reduce fire hazards, it is reasonable to clarify existing the requirement in Rule 38 (Table 2) of General Order 95 of taking known local conditions into account when designing, constructing, and maintaining facilities, specifically conductor separation, in areas subject to high winds. This modification is incorporated into footnote (zz) to Rule 38 (Table 2).
16. It is reasonable to add Rule 44.2 to General Order 95 to address fire hazard issues related to pole overloading and to adopt Ordering Paragraphs 3 and 4 to address the exchange of pole loading information and exemptions from load calculations.
17. It is reasonable to revise General Order 165 to increase current frequency of patrol inspections in rural areas that lie within "Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones" in Southern California. Increased patrols could reduce fire hazards. The costs associated with increase patrols will be addressed in phase 2.
18. To reduce fire hazards before the upcoming fall fire season, it is reasonable to direct all entities subject to the revised rules and adopted ordering paragraphs adopted today to take all reasonable measures to immediately begin implementation these directives.
19. It is reasonable to appoint a neutral facilitator for phase 2 workshops. The neutral facilitator will be one of the Commission's Alternative Dispute Resolution ALJs, the assigned ALJ, or another appropriate staff member.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The term "Communication Infrastructure Provider" or "CIP" is defined as any entity that has attached facilities to an electric utility's poles for the purpose of providing communication services. Communication Infrastructure Providers shall begin performing patrol inspections of their facilities in designated Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones as identified in Cal Fire's Fire and Resource Assessment Program Fire Threat Map, in the following Southern California counties: Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino. The boundaries of the Fire Threat Map shall be broadly construed, and Communication Infrastructure Providers should use their own expertise and judgment to determine if local conditions require them to adjust the boundaries of the map. The Communication Infrastructure Providers' patrol inspections shall encompass all of their overhead lines installed on joint use poles with electric distribution or transmission facilities, as well as those facilities that are one pole length away from joint use poles with electric distribution or transmission lines in the designated areas. The Communication Infrastructure Providers shall take appropriate corrective action of any safety hazards or violations of General Orders 95 that are identified during the patrol inspections. The patrol inspections shall be completed no later than September 30, 2010. Communication Infrastructure Providers shall maintain documentation which would allow Commission staff to verify that such inspections and corrective actions were completed, including the location of the poles/equipment inspected, the date of inspection, and the personnel that performed the inspection and corrective action. Such documentation shall be retained for five years. "Patrol inspection" shall be defined as a simple visual inspection of applicable communications infrastructure equipment and structures that is designed to identify obvious structural problems and hazards. Patrol inspections may be carried out in the course of other company business.
2. Extreme and Very High Fire Threat Zones are defined by California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) Fire Threat Map. The FRAP Fire Threat Map is to be used to establish approximate boundaries for purposes of this rule. The boundaries of the map are to be broadly construed and utilities should use their own expertise and judgment to determine if local conditions require them to adjust the boundaries of the map.
3. When any utility, communication infrastructure provider, or other appropriate entity performs a pole load calculations, the necessary data shall be provided upon request within 15 business days of the request; however, if circumstances do not allow for the data to be provided within 15 days, the utility or Communication Infrastructure Provider providing the data shall inform the requesting party and Consumer Protection and Safety Division (or its successor) of the delay, reason for the delay and the estimated date the data will be provided.
4. For purposes of pole loading and Rule 44.2 of General Order 95, additional facilities that "materially increase the load on a structure" refers to an addition which increases the load on a pole by more than five percent per installation, or 10 percent over a 12 month span of the utility's or Communication Infrastructure Provider's current load.
5. We adopt the revisions to General Order 95 and General Order 165 set forth herein. These revisions to General Order 95 and General Order 165 are included at Attachments B and C, respectively.
6. We direct all entities subject to the revised rules and ordering paragraphs adopted today to take all reasonable measures to begin implementation of these directives.
7. We direct each cost-of-service regulated utility to file an advice letter establishing a memorandum account and to record its costs related to implementing these measures in a memorandum account to avoid retroactive ratemaking.
8. Rulemaking 08-11-005 remains open for consideration of issues in phase 2.
This order is effective today.
Dated August 20, 2009, at San Francisco, California.
MICHAEL R. PEEVEY
President
DIAN M. GRUENEICH
JOHN A. BOHN
RACHELLE B. CHONG
TIMOTHY ALAN SIMON
Commissioners
