V. Commission EMF Jurisdiction

The courts have acknowledged the Commission's jurisdiction in reviewing EMF-related matters. For example, the California Supreme Court issued a decision in SDG&E v. Covalt, 13 Cal 4^th 893, (1996), ruling that by issuing D.93-11-013 and establishing interim EMF policies, the Commission has claimed exclusive jurisdiction over issues related to EMF exposure while its investigation into the health effects of EMFs continued. The Supreme Court held that, "the Commission has broad authority to determine whether the service or equipment of any public utility poses any danger to the health or safety of the public, and if so, to prescribe corrective measures and order them into effect." (13 Cal 4^th 893, 923 (1996)). Additionally, the Court has interpreted the Commission's authority to require every public utility to construct, maintain and operate its facilities and equipment in a manner that safeguards the health and safety of its employees, customers, and the public, including the Commission's duty to regulate EMFs. (13 Cal 4^th 893, 923 (1996)). The Court also points to the Legislative directive (Stats. 1988, ch. 1551, §2 subd. (d)) for the Commission and DHS to investigate the health risks associated with EMFs and report the results. (13 Cal 4^th 893, 926 [1996]).