II. Edison's Motion
In this investigation, the Commission is examining Edison's electric line construction, operation and maintenance practices during 1998 through 2000.2 Ordering Paragraph 4 of the Commission's OII directs that Edison's discovery of the CSD relate to the specific violations alleged in this OII.
Edison brings a motion to compel to obtain information from CSD on the following general categories:
· Other Edison safety and maintenance incidents which are not specified as alleged violations in the OII;
· Alleged safety and maintenance violations by the following large electric and gas utilities: Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.
· CSD's policies, practices, and standards.
Edison claims entitlement to the requested information under Ordering Paragraph 4 of the OII, because the information is necessary for its defenses such as vagueness, waiver, laches, estoppel, ratification, and selective enforcement. Edison alternatively challenges the discovery directives set forth in Ordering Paragraph 4, and asserts that the Commission too narrowly circumscribed the scope of discovery. Edison analogizes to criminal law and argues that CSD is in possession of information which can exculpate Edison. Accordingly, Edison contends that CSD should produce all such evidence, just as a criminal prosecutor would be required to do. Edison also claims that its due process rights will be violated unless it gains access to this material.
2 The OII also provides that CSD may move to enter into evidence its findings on any alleged violations from additional inspections found after the issuance of the order.
