2. Background
Today's decision addresses the remaining safety phase issues in this proceeding. Decision (D.) 11-04-031 approved and adopted a settlement in this proceeding which addressed the revenue requirement and rates associated with the gas transmission and storage (GT&S) facilities of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) for the four-year rate cycle from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2014. The settlement was reached, and the motion to adopt the settlement was filed, before the September 9, 2010 San Bruno explosion and fire (San Bruno explosion).1 As a result of the San Bruno explosion, a revised scoping memo and ruling (revised scoping ruling) was issued on October 15, 2010 which added a safety phase to this proceeding to address safety concerns raised by the San Bruno explosion.
The revised scoping ruling asked the parties to file opening and reply comments on the types of protocols and procedures the Commission should order to ensure the safe operation of PG&E's GT&S operations over the next four years and beyond. The parties were asked to comment on the following: PG&E's procedures regarding the deployment and transportation of its personnel to an incident, and the type of coordination that exists between PG&E and emergency response personnel; whether PG&E's outreach to emergency response personnel concerning the availability of information about PG&E's gas transmission lines and shut-off valves was adequate or if additional steps should be taken to ensure that emergency response personnel have the type of information they need to assess and manage situations involving PG&E's gas transmission lines; the frequency of testing or monitoring of the shut-off valves for the gas transmission lines and gas storage; and whether other safety-related protocols or procedures should be required of PG&E during the rate cycle, and whether workshops and/or evidentiary hearings on these issues were needed.2
PG&E was the only party who filed comments in response to the revised scoping ruling. PG&E's comments were summarized in the February 3, 2011 ruling. That ruling stated that no workshops or hearings were needed on these issues, and that a proposed decision would be prepared on the safety-related protocols and procedures that PG&E should be required to have in place during the four-year period covered by this rate cycle and beyond. Today's decision sets forth those safety-related protocols and procedures.
1 In a September 15, 2010 ruling, the parties were asked to comment on whether the settlement was adequate in light of the pipeline safety concerns raised by the San Bruno explosion. D.11-04-031 addressed the adequacy of the amounts in the settlement for PG&E's planned pipeline safety, reliability, and integrity efforts over the rate cycle period.
2 The revised scoping ruling also asked the parties to comment on the type of procedures that should be in place to monitor PG&E's reprioritization of its capital expenditures associated with its gas transmission lines. The Gas Transmission and Storage Safety Report (Safety Report), which was adopted in D.11-04-031, requires PG&E to provide a semi-annual report. This report will allow the Commission to monitor if these high priority projects are being carried out by PG&E, and to monitor PG&E's spending on gas storage and gas transmission safety, reliability, and integrity capital projects and maintenance activities.
