A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Pacific Gas and Electric Co. must comply with a series of new wildfire-prevention requirements or else risk violation of its probation arising from the 2010 San Bruno pipeline explosion.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup decided at a hearing in San Francisco to impose his latest proposal on the utility, which includes making compliance with vegetation management rules a new probation term, among other measures.
PG&E had wanted Alsup to let state officials first find it had violated tree-trimming requirements or the company's own fire prevention plan before a probation violation is also triggered.
Alsup, who is overseeing the five years' probation a different federal judge imposed on PG&E in 2017, rejected the company's request.
"The truth is, I want to see you succeed," Alsup told PG&E's interim CEO, John Simon, who was at the hearing. "I want to see the people of California safe in their homes. I know that's probably what you want. But we got to get there."
Alsup noted to Simon the rapidly approaching start of the state's traditional wildfire season in a few months, and said that by the end of the year, "we will know how many fires your company has started."
"I'm hoping the answer is zero," the judge said.
"Me too," Simon responded.
In a statement after the hearing, PG&E spokesman James Noonan said the company shares "the court's commitment to safety."
PG&E knows it must "play a leading role in reducing the risk of wildfire throughout Northern and Central California," he said. The "centerpiece of this effort," Noonan said, is the fire prevention plan the company recently submitted to state regulators -- and will now be required to comply with as part of its probation.
"As we informed the court, we remain committed to complying with all rules and regulations and working hard to keep our customers and communities safe," Noonan said in the statement.
Additionally, Alsup floated the possibility of extending the term of PG&E's probation by one year but has yet to rule on the idea, instead asking for attorneys involved with the proceedings to respond with written briefings in two weeks. The parties must also respond by that date to a lawyer's request that reports from the company's court-imposed monitor be made public.
Alsup began considering expanding the utility's probation terms last year because of its role in recent wildfires that have since led PG&E into bankruptcy court -- just a few floors down in the same San Francisco courthouse where Alsup presides.
The judge originally proposed an ambitious series of proposed conditions that would have required PG&E to inspect and rate the safety of its entire electrical system in the coming months, among other measures. PG&E said that plan was unworkable, estimating the price tag at as much as $150 billion and saying it would require a workforce of more than 650,000 full-time employees.
After a hearing earlier this year and a flurry of court filings from various parties, he came back with a more modest proposal.
Alsup's now-approved plan makes PG&E's full compliance with vegetation management laws part of its probation terms and restricts the company's ability to issue dividends to shareholders. PG&E's tree-trimming program will also be subject to random inspections, along with other requirements.
If he finds PG&E violated its probation terms, the judge would have wide latitude to impose even further restrictions on the embattled company, including still stricter government oversight. PG&E's bankruptcy judge has said Alsup could theoretically oust the company's current leadership and put a government trustee in control of the state's largest utility.
At the hearing in January, Alsup found PG&E violated its probation because the company did not properly report a settlement it reached with Butte County regarding a small 2017 wildfire. He has yet to hold a sentencing hearing on that ruling.
Alsup has also postponed consideration of requiring PG&E to turn off some of its power lines when dangerously dry and windy weather makes them more likely to start wildfires. At Tuesday's hearing, he said PG&E should consider whether it wants him to make that part of the company's probation terms so that the judge could take the blame if communities complain about the disruptions caused by planned blackouts.
"I'm willing to take that heat," Alsup said. "But we're not there yet."
Earlier in the hearing, the judge had some pointed words for PG&E and its role in the past two seasons of historically devastating wildfires. He accused the company of spending billions of dollars on shareholder dividends in recent years while allowing its vegetation management budget to "wither, so that a lot of trees that should have been taken down were not."
California is grappling with a wildfire crisis, Alsup said.
"And PG&E is the single most culpable entity in the mix," he said. "Not the only one -- there's blame to go around for others, too. But PG&E has started way more than its share of these fires."
Dario de Ghetaldi, the Bay Area attorney who has sought to make the federal monitor's reports public, also wanted Alsup to take a look at the investigation from California Public Utilities Commission staff that said PG&E repeatedly falsified certain gas pipeline safety records for several years.
Alsup said he would ask the monitor to evaluate the matter and determine if the court should consider any further probation conditions as a result.
(c)2019 the San Francisco Chronicle
