2. Procedural Background
The Commission opened this proceeding as a result of the December 24, 2008 natural gas explosion that occurred at 10708 Paiute Way in Rancho Cordova. One person died as a result of the explosion, and several persons were injured. The house at 10708 Paiute Way was destroyed, and adjoining houses suffered property damage.
Following the Rancho Cordova explosion and fire, the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) and the Commission's Consumer Protection and Safety Division (CPSD) conducted separate investigations into the cause of the explosion. NTSB adopted its "Pipeline Accident Brief" on May 18, 2010, and CPSD released its "Incident Investigation Report on Rancho Cordova Explosion and Fire" on November 10, 2010. CPSD's report also addressed whether Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) violated any statutes, Commission decisions, general orders (GOs), other Commission and state regulations or standards, and whether any such violations caused or contributed to the explosion and the injuries and damage.
The Order Instituting Investigation (OII or investigation) into the Rancho Cordova explosion and fire was opened on November 19, 2010. PG&E was directed to submit a report and supporting documents responsive to the directives set forth in the OII. A request by PG&E to extend the submission date for PG&E's report and supporting documents was granted in a December 17, 2010 e-mail ruling and confirmed in a December 23, 2010 written ruling. PG&E served its report and supporting documents on February 17, 2011.1
The Commission held a prehearing conference on March 1, 2011 to discuss the scope of issues and the procedural schedule. On April 18, 2011, the scoping memo and ruling was issued, and evidentiary hearings were set for July 18, 2011 through July 29, 2011. The Utility Reform Network (TURN) served its testimony on June 17, 2011.
On June 20, 2011, PG&E and CPSD separately filed their joint motion "for approval of stipulation to order resolving investigation," and their "Stipulation to Order Resolving Investigation" (PG&E and CPSD stipulation). The PG&E and CPSD stipulation was marked for identification as Exhibit 17.2 The joint motion requests that the Commission approve the PG&E and CPSD stipulation without modification, and that this investigation be closed.
Due to the filing of the joint motion, and the PG&E and CPSD stipulation, an e-mail ruling was issued on June 21, 2011 advising the parties as to when the comments on the joint motion and the PG&E and CPSD stipulation would be due.3 The e-mail ruling reserved July 29, 2011 as the date for a possible hearing on contested issues of fact regarding the PG&E and CPSD stipulation, and the remaining evidentiary hearing dates were taken off calendar.
Following the filing of the PG&E and CPSD stipulation, PG&E and TURN entered into their own "Stipulation to Order Resolving Investigation" (PG&E and TURN stipulation). The PG&E and TURN stipulation was attached to the July 20, 2011 "Comment of TURN on Proposed Joint Stipulation Between PG&E and CPSD," which was marked for identification as Exhibit 18. TURN requests that the PG&E and TURN stipulation be incorporated into the Commission decision granting the joint motion to adopt the PG&E and CPSD stipulation.
The parties were notified by e-mail rulings on July 22 and 25, 2011 that the July 29, 2011 evidentiary hearing would be held to have the sponsoring witnesses answer questions regarding the PG&E and CPSD stipulation, and the PG&E and TURN stipulation.
An evidentiary hearing on the two stipulations was held on July 29, 2011. Three witnesses testified regarding the PG&E and CPSD stipulation, and two witnesses testified regarding the PG&E and TURN stipulation. Eighteen documents, including the CPSD and PG&E reports, were marked for identification as exhibits at this hearing. This proceeding was then submitted to address the joint motion of PG&E and CPSD, the PG&E and CPSD stipulation, and the PG&E and TURN stipulation.
1 PG&E also provided other supporting documents after February 17, 2011.
2 As stated at 5 of the Reporter's Transcript (RT) at 5, the exhibits were marked for identification, but have not been admitted into evidence pending the outcome of the joint motion to approve and adopt the PG&E and CPSD stipulation.
3 The June 21, 2011 e-mail ruling was subsequently confirmed in a July 7, 2011 written ruling.
