3. DisabRA's Petition to Modify D.09-09-030
3.1. Summary of the Petition
DisabRA represents that SDG&E has refused to commit to any plan for notifying customers when SDG&E anticipates that it will shut off power for safety reasons pursuant to its statutory authority, or for helping customers to cope with statutory shut offs by providing shelter, evacuation assistance, generators, or financial assistance.
DisabRA is concerned that shutting off power without notice or mitigation will place SDG&E's residential customers at serious risk, especially those with disabilities. To ensure that the public is protected in the event of a statutory shut off, DisabRA asks the Commission to modify D.09-09-030 to (1) require SDG&E to take appropriate and feasible steps to warn and protect its customers whenever SDG&E shuts off power pursuant to its statutory authority; and (2) state that the Commission's after-the-fact review of a statutory shut-off may assess the adequacy of the notice and mitigation provided by SDG&E.
3.2. Summary of Responses to the Petition
CPSD and DRA support DisabRA's petition to modify D.09-09-030. CPSD and DRA argue that shutting off power without sufficient mitigation would be contrary to D.09-09-030, which rejected SDG&E's proposed shut-off plan because it would, on balance, do more harm than good.
The County of San Diego supports DisabRA's petition. The County believes that granting the petition will provide an incentive for SDG&E to implement reasonable mitigation requests from stakeholders, and also prevent SDG&E from shifting all costs for an outage to SDG&E's customers, even though some of these costs are more cost-effectively borne by SDG&E.
MGRA supports DisabRA's petition. At the same time, MGRA agrees with the general principle that it may be prudent to shut off power to prevent power-line fire ignitions during extreme weather conditions.
SCE opposes DisabRA's petition because it could adversely affect SCE's ability to respond to emergencies. Although SCE has no plans to shut off power based on pre-defined weather conditions, SCE does de-energize circuits when necessary for public safety. For example, SCE will shut off power when debris hits a power line during a wind storm, vegetation contacts a power line, or a power line is down for any reason (e.g., pole hit by a vehicle). In situations like these, SCE endeavors to notify customers, but SCE says it has no obligation to do so if emergency conditions require an immediate shut-off. Mitigation for all outages, whatever the cause, is addressed by SCE's Service Guarantee Program, which applies when an unplanned outage exceeds 24 hours.
SCE is concerned that a requirement to notify customers prior to de-energizing a power line would take precedence over public safety. SCE opines that uncertainty about whether a condition is "dangerous enough" to permit immediate shut-off without customer notification, and to what extent the utility must implement mitigation beyond its service guarantee, should not be occupying the minds of utility decision-makers during emergency situations.
SDG&E opposes DisabRA's petition to modify D.09-09-030. SDG&E argues that the petition is unnecessary because SDG&E is implicitly obligated by §§ 399.2 and 451 to provide customer notification and other mitigation when feasible and appropriate. For public-safety outages, SDG&E will provide a pre-recorded telephone notice to the general population, and additional personal notification to medical baseline customers, life support customers, and assigned commercial accounts. SDG&E's notification system includes text capability to reach those with hearing disabilities. SDG&E will also implement mitigation measures when emergency conditions require SDG&E to shut off power.
SDG&E contends that to the extent DisabRA's petition is interpreted as a proposal for a new and higher standard, the proposal should be rejected for three reasons. First, the standard is vague. The petition does not identify any specific notice or mitigations requirements.
Second, the petition does not address the potential conflict between the existing public-safety obligation and a new standard for customer notification and mitigation. Imposing a new imperative without identifying its precise requirements or how it interacts with existing obligations may result in unintended negative consequences that undermine public safety.
Finally, to the extent DisabRA seeks to require SDG&E to implement the mitigation measures proposed by SDG&E in A.08-12-021, the petition does not address the feasibility of those mitigation measures in the context of a statutory shutoff event. SDG&E's application involved a proactive shut-off plan, whereas a statutory shutoff event is reactive and applies only where conditions threaten immediate harm to SDG&E's system. It may not be possible to implement the mitigation measures proposed in A.08-12-021 in every emergency situation.
3.3. Discussion
In D.09-09-030, the Commission held that SDG&E has authority under § 399.2 and § 451 to shut off power during emergencies when necessary to protect public safety.9 DisabRA seeks to modify D.09-09-030 to require SDG&E to take all feasible and appropriate steps to (1) notify customers of statutory shutoff events, and (2) mitigate the costs and risks that statutory shutoff events impose on customers. DisabRA also seeks to modify D.09-09-030 to state that the Commission's review of a statutory shutoff event may assess the adequacy of the notice and mitigation provided by SDG&E. The Commission has broad jurisdiction under the California Constitution and the Public Utilities Code to grant or deny DisabRA's petition.10
SDG&E acknowledges that it is implicitly obligated by § 399.2 and § 451 to provide notice and mitigation, to the extent feasible and appropriate, whenever its shuts off power.11 Therefore, we conclude that it is reasonable to adopt DisabRA's petition to modify D.09-09-030, as doing so merely formalizes an existing requirement.
It is not possible to anticipate every emergency situation where power may be shut off for safety reasons and then specify the exact notice and mitigation measures that should be implemented in each situation. In general, SDG&E should provide as much notice as feasible before shutting off power so the affected providers of essential services (e.g., schools, hospitals, prisons, public safety agencies, telecommunications utilities, and water districts) and customers who are especially vulnerable to power interruptions (e.g., customers who rely on medical life-support equipment) may implement their own emergency plans. Once power is shut off, SDG&E should focus its resources on restoring power as soon as possible. Any remaining resources should be concentrated on providing other mitigation to the extent feasible and appropriate under the circumstances.
9 D.09-09-030, Conclusion of Law 3.
10 California Constitution Article XII, §§ 3 and 6, and Pub. Util. Code §§ 216, 701, 761-770, 8037, and 8056.
11 SDG&E Response at 2 - 3.
