IV. PRELIMINARY SCOPING MEMO
A. Discussion, Need For Hearings, Scope And Order To Show Cause
It is essential to protect Californians from future utility-related hazards, such as fires. The Commission is deeply concerned about the identified hazards alleged in the CPSD Report and, if those hazards are proven in this proceeding, the Commission will take effective remedial action. Also, utility cooperation with the Commission and its staff is vital and will be scrutinized to determine if any lapses occurred and, if so, what should be done in response.
To these ends, the Commission intends to direct SDG&E to reply to specific questions and to hold public hearings on this matter. The Commission also invites interested parties to actively participate in this proceeding as it involves important safety and other policy matters that will benefit from the expertise, participation, and evidence of other parties.
This proceeding shall seek to:
(1) determine whether SDG&E was in violation of any provision of the Public Utilities Code, general orders, other rules, or requirements, regarding its facilities linked to the Witch Fire;
(2) determine whether SDG&E was in violation of any provision of the Public Utilities Code, general orders, other rules, or requirements, regarding tree inspection and trimming policies and the facilities linked to the Rice Fire;
(3) determine whether SDG&E failed to cooperate, and/or is continuing to fail to cooperate, with the CPSD investigation concerning the Witch and/or Rice Fires.
SDG&E appears to be in violation of applicable law, as CPSD has made a prima facie showing regarding violations. CPSD has also alleged the need to improve the operations and practices of SDG&E, in order to mitigate the risks posed by utility-related fires. Further, the allegations contained in the attached CPSD Report, which are supported by the Declaration of CPSD Investigator Steve Intably (Declaration), constitute a sufficient record to justify this formal investigation into violations by SDG&E. Thus, this Order enters the CPSD Report and the Declaration into the record for this proceeding.
Based on the prima facie showing in the CPSD Report and Declaration, it appears that SDG&E failed to adequately maintain its facilities, by allowing its conductors to contact each other in the Witch Fire. It also appears that SDG&E failed to utilize safe tree inspection and trimming policies, which allowed a sycamore tree limb with internal rot to fall on its conductor in the Rice Fire. Further, it appears that SDG&E failed to cooperate with the CPSD investigation. This Order to Show Cause directs SDG&E to appear and show cause as to why the Commission should not make a finding that it failed to adequately maintain its facilities which have been linked to these incidents, utilize safe tree inspection and trimming policies, and cooperate with the CPSD investigations. We hereby place SDG&E on notice and provide an opportunity for SDG&E to be heard on the issue of whether it violated applicable law, and whether penalties and/or any other forms of relief should be imposed.1
SDG&E is put on notice that the Commission may calculate a penalty based on the number of violations, the number of days that SDG&E was in violation, as a means of deterring future misconduct, and as a punitive measure. SDG&E is also put on notice that the Commission may order the implementation of operational and policy measures designed to prevent future hazards.
SDG&E is ordered to appear and show cause why it has not committed the alleged violations, and/or allowed the following unsafe conditions to occur. SDG&E is ordered to fully respond to the following questions, as well as the attached Data Request, by December 8, 2008:
A. Regarding the Witch Fire, did SDG&E's conductors to come in contact with each other?
B. Regarding the Witch Fire, did SDG&E fail to ensure proper clearances and maintain its facilities, between poles Z416675 and Z416676, in a manner consistent with General Order (GO) 95, Rule 31.1, Rule 38, Rule 43 (inclusive of subsections), Rule 44 (inclusive of subsections); Public Utilities Code § 451; and/or any other Commission rule, regulation, order, requirement or state law?
C. Regarding the Rice Fire, should the sycamore tree limb that fell on the lines between SDG&E poles 213072 and 112340 have been trimmed before October 22, 2007?
D. Regarding the Rice Fire, should SDG&E, or any agent of SDG&E, have known that the sycamore tree limb that fell on the lines between SDG&E poles 213072 and 112340 had internal rot?
E. Regarding the Rice Fire, should SDG&E, or any agent of SDG&E, have taken any steps in order to discover the internal rot, before the tree failed? If yes, what steps should have been taken? If not, why not?
F. Regarding the Rice Fire, did SDG&E fail to utilize safe tree inspection and trimming policies, in a manner consistent with General Order (GO) 95, Rule 31.1, Rule 35; Public Utilities Code § 451; and/or any other Commission rule, regulation, order, requirement or state law?
G. Did SDG&E fail to cooperate with the CPSD investigation in the Witch and Rice Fires in violation of Public Utilities Code §§ 309.7(b), 313, 314, 315, 581, 582, 584, 701, 702, 771, 1794, 1795, ALJ Resolution 195, and/or the CPUC Accident Reporting Requirements?
H. Were SDG&E's practices, related to these matters, reasonable and prudent?
B. Schedule
As stated above, the Commission notifies SDG&E that the Commission will set hearings to review the issues raised by this matter. The Commission intends to set a prehearing conference to consider and adopt a hearing schedule and schedule other matters for this proceeding.
C. Categorization
This proceeding is categorized as adjudicatory. Ex parte communications are prohibited. The determination as to category is appealable under Rule 7.6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. An investigation is instituted on the Commission's own motion to determine whether SDG&E violated any provision of the Public Utilities Code, general orders, other rules, or requirements by allowing its conductors to contact each other (Witch Fire) and failing to utilize safe tree trimming and inspection policies (Rice Fire).
2. An investigation is instituted on the Commission's own motion to determine whether SDG&E violated any provision of the Public Utilities Code, general orders, other rules, or requirements by failing to cooperate with the CPSD investigation, in the Witch and Rice Fires, as required by law.
3. SDG&E is a Respondent to this investigation.
4. SDG&E is directed to show cause as to why the Commission should not find it in violation of provisions of the Public Utilities Code, general orders, other rules, or requirements identified in this Order in Section IV (including GO 95, Rule 31.1, Rule 38, Rule 43 (inclusive of subsections), Rule 44 (inclusive of subsections); Public Utilities Code §§ 309.7(b), 313, 314, 315, 451, 581, 582, 584, 701, 702, 771, 1794, 1795; ALJ Resolution 195; the CPUC Accident Reporting Requirements; and/or engaging in unreasonable and/or imprudent practices related to these matters), and why the Commission should not impose a penalty, and/or any other form of relief, if any violations are found. SDG&E is also directed to fully respond to all of the questions contained in Section IV of this Order, and the attached Data Request, by December 8, 2008.
5. SDG&E is put on notice that fines may be imposed in this matter pursuant to Public Utilities Code §§ 2107, 2108.
6. SDG&E is put on notice that the Commission may order the implementation of operational and policy measures designed to prevent future hazards pursuant to Public Utilities Code § 761.
7. Pursuant to Rule 7.1(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, this proceeding is categorized as adjudicatory, deemed to require hearings, and this Order includes a preliminary scoping memo. This Order, only as to category, is appealable under Rule 7.6.
8. A prehearing conference shall be convened before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for the purpose of establishing a schedule in this matter, including the date, time, and location of an evidentiary hearing, and for good cause shown the ALJ and/or Assigned Commissioner may extend the deadline of December 8, 2008 for any particular responses required from SDG&E.
9. The attached CPSD Report, supported by Declaration, is hereby entered into the record for this proceeding.
10. The Executive Director shall cause a copy of this Order to be personally served on SDG&E.
This order is effective today.
Dated November 6, 2008 at San Francisco, California.
MICHAEL R. PEEVEY
President
DIAN M. GRUENEICH
JOHN A. BOHN
RACHELLE B. CHONG
TIMOTHY A. SIMON
Commissioners
ATTACHMENT 1
DATA REQUEST (WITCH AND RICE)
Provide the following information and documents to CPSD by no later than December 8, 2008.
1) Prepare a comprehensive report of SDG&E's position in this matter, including:
a. the cause of the Witch and Rice Fires;
b. a full explanation of the facts and circumstances supporting SDG&E's position;
c. all supporting documentation in SDG&E's possession of any fact asserted in its response;
d. the names and contact information of any witnesses that SDG&E asserts would substantiate its claims; and
e. any assertion contained in the CPSD Report that SDG&E agrees with, or stipulates to.
2) Provide all communications between SDG&E (including its legal representatives and/or affiliates) and Davey Tree Expert Company (including its legal representatives and/or affiliates) regarding the Rice Fire.
ATTACHMENT 2
Before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California
Petition of San Diego Gas & Electric Company (U 902 E) to Adopt, Amend, or Repeal a Regulation Pursuant to Pub. Util. Code § 1708.5 |
Petition 07-11-007 (Filed November 6, 2007)
|
1 See Pub. Util. Code §§ 761, 2107, 2108.
