August 21, 2009

State halts SDG&E plan to cut rural area power
Temporary order foreshadows clash next month before PUC

By Michael Gardner
U-T Sacramento Bureau

SAN FRANCISCO - The California Public Utilities Commissionyesterday temporarily blocked controversial plans by San Diego Gas& Electric Co. to cut power to 55,000 rural customers when firedanger is imminent.

The 3-2 decision sets the stage for a showdown before thecommission Sept. 10, when a much more crucial - and possibly permanent- ruling is expected.

At that hearing, commissioners will take up competingrecommendations to either prohibit SDG&E from moving forward orallow a test of the plan until the end of the year.

Commissioner Timothy Simon, who has proposed a pilot program withstrict conditions, yesterday voted for a temporary restraining orderthat will keep SDG&E from launching its cutoff initiative untilafter the commission acts on his recommendations.

The PUC is deciding whether SDG&E has the authority it claims it has to cut power in extreme fire conditions.

Simon, in advocating his alternative yesterday, said, "I believethere is the oversight, checks and balances, and remedial measuresnecessary to ensure that unilateral authority is not exercised by theutility."

Of the two dissenters, Commissioner John Bohn was the most forcefulin support of SDG&E's position, arguing that "it is appropriatethat they make the decision on when a safety hazard exists."

A coalition of water agencies, school districts and others had asked the commission to block the shut-off proposal.

The utility company came up with the plan after being sued byinsurers, homeowners and government agencies in the aftermath of threelarge fires in 2007 sparked by arcing power lines. SDG&E has paidout $740 million in settlements so far.

If implemented, the plan potentially could black out homes andbusinesses, affecting about 130,000 residents in parts of Alpine,Lakeside, Poway, Escondido, Valley Center and Fallbrook. Customerswould be provided a six-hour notice under the SDG&E plan.

Much of the debate before the commission yesterday centered onwhether the plan would cause irreparable harm, one of the tests thatmust be met before the commission can step in and stop the process,even for a short period.

"Irreparable harm cannot be speculative," said Michael Niggli, SDG&E's chief operating officer. "It must be real."

That view was strongly criticized by Jennifer Haley, an attorney representing opponents of the plan.

"The showing of irreparable harm doesn't require us to produce abody," Haley said, adding that the commission must act now "to preventthe irreparable harm that will happen."

Critics said shutting off power would threaten the safety ofhundreds of disabled residents, make it difficult to evacuate schoolsand potentially create chaos at traffic signals.

Harvey Morris, the commission's ratepayer advocate, said: "Whathappens if they die before moving? Who's going to be responsible?"

Issuing the loudest warnings are water agencies, which contend thatfirefighters and residents could quickly run out of water if pumps areshut down.

Niggli argued that the commission could actually increase the risk of firestorms by blocking the plan.

"It would tie the hands of the company to operate safely," he said."The commission should not take the shut-off decision out of ourhands."

Niggli told commissioners that some public schools and waterdistricts so far have turned away offers to help deal with theshut-offs, such as helping with generators.

The company has also tried to reach out and offer assistance tohundreds of disabled residents, but said efforts through the mail,phone calls and knocking on doors have largely been unsuccessful.

Commissioners spent an hour listening to the dueling argumentsyesterday. Commissioner Rachelle Chong joined Bohn in opposing therestraining order, while Dian Grueneich and Michael Peevey voted for italong with Simon.

The utility contends that turning off power during certain "redflag" fire warnings will greatly lower the risk of catastrophic blazesin a region that has endured horrific firestorms over the past sixyears.

Specific conditions that would trigger the power cutoff, accordingto SDG&E, are 35 mph sustained winds, or 55 mph gusts withsustained winds of 30 mph, along with relative humidity of 20 percentor less.

"Does the commission want to prevent SDG&E from turning off thepower in the highest fire-prone areas and risk another devastatingwildfire in San Diego?" Niggli asked. "Does it want to preventSDG&E from turning the power off even if there are hurricane-forcewinds? Does it want to substitute its judgment for the utility's inthese instances? We think the answer is clearly no."

Haley, the attorney for opponents, questioned some of the criteria, particularly a 35 mph threshold for sustained winds.

That speed "barely rises to the level of a tropical storm," she said, calling the plan, "unproven, untested and unprecedented."

On Sept. 10, commissioners are expected to take more definitiveaction. Before them is a recommendation from administrative law JudgeTimothy Kenney to reject the SDG&E proposal. However, Simon wants apilot program to see how it works.

The commissioner suggested that the utility's test period shouldhave tight restrictions, such as requiring 12 hours' notice and givingCal Fire, the state's fire agency, or the county Office of EmergencyServices veto power.

Simon's list of conditions would require power to be restoredwithin 24 hours, unless fire officials agree to an extension. He alsoproposed to write into any commission rule provisions that SDG&Eplans to do voluntarily, such as providing $250 debit cards to poorresidents who are affected, opening evacuation centers and providinggenerators to schools and water districts.

Commissioners are not bound by either recommendation and could craft their own next month.

---

Michael Gardner: (916) 445-2934;

Related Terms: Escondido, Fallbrook, Lakeside, Poway, SDG&E, Valley Center, Wildfires