SB 1003: Electricity: wildfire mitigation.
- Session Year: 2023-2024
- House: Senate
- Latest Version Date: 2024-08-28
Current Status:
Failed
(2024-08-31: Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 54. Noes 17. Page 7099.))
Introduced
In Committee
First Chamber
In Committee
Second Chamber
Enacted
Existing law establishes the Wildfire Safety Division and requires the division to perform certain regulatory functions related to wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations. Existing law transferred all functions of the Wildfire Safety Division to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety effective July 1, 2021.
This bill would repeal the Wildfire Safety Division.
Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment.
This bill would require those actions to take into account the time required to implement proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
Existing law requires each electrical corporation to annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan that covers at least a 3-year period and authorizes the office to allow for annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan, but requires the electrical corporation to submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every 3 years for review. Existing law requires wildfire mitigation plans to include, among other things, a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, and a description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, as specified.
This bill instead would require each electrical corporation to submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review at least once every 4 years. The bill would require each electrical corporation, beginning January 1, 2026, to submit a preliminary wildfire mitigation plan to the office at the earliest date of one year before the filing of its general rate case application or concurrent with the filing of its Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase application with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The bill would revise those wildfire mitigation plan requirements to, among other things, require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation, and require the presentation of certain cost-efficiency measures adopted by the PUC, as specified.
Existing law requires the office to approve or deny each wildfire mitigation plan and update submitted by an electrical corporation within 3 months of its submission. Existing law establishes procedures for the office to oversee compliance with an approved wildfire mitigation plan. Existing law requires the PUC to consider whether the cost of implementing an electrical corporations wildfire mitigation plan is just and reasonable in the electrical corporations general rate case application.
This bill instead would require the office to approve or deny a wildfire mitigation plan submitted by an electrical corporation within 9 months of its submission. The bill would, for a general rate case application filed after January 1, 2027, require an electrical corporation to file the wildfire mitigation plan approved by the office or, if the plan has not been approved by the office, the preliminary wildfire plan filed with the office, and any applicable decision from the office, with the general rate case application. The bill would require an electrical corporation, within 45 days of the PUCs decision on whether the cost of implementing the electrical corporations wildfire mitigation plan is just and reasonable in the electrical corporations general rate case or any PUC order modifying that decision, to submit to the office a revised wildfire mitigation plan that conforms to the PUCs revenue authorization. The bill would require the office to approve the revised wildfire mitigation plan within 2 months of submission and would require the electrical corporation to file the approved revised wildfire mitigation plan as an information-only submittal with the PUC. The bill would revise and recast provisions related to the oversight by the office in the implementation of, and the enforcement by the PUC of, the finally approved wildfire mitigation plan.
Existing law requires the PUC to establish an expedited utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program for large electrical corporations. In order to participate in the program, existing law requires a large electrical corporation to submit to the office a distribution infrastructure undergrounding plan, as provided. Upon approval of the plan by the office, existing law requires the large electrical corporation to submit to the PUC an application requesting review and conditional approval of the plans costs and other specified information.
This bill would revise the provisions related to the expedited utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program to, among other things, specify that the approval of a distribution infrastructure undergrounding plan is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, as specified.
Existing law requires the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board to annually make recommendations to the office on various topics, including the appropriate scope and process for assessing the safety culture of an electrical corporation. Existing law requires the office to annually issue an analysis and recommendation to the PUC on the recommendations provided by the board. Existing law requires the PUC to annually adopt and approve, among other things, a process for the office to conduct annual safety culture assessments for each electrical corporation.
This bill would repeal those provisions.
Existing law requires local publicly owned electric utilities and electrical cooperatives to annually prepare and submit to the board, on or before July 1 of each year, wildfire mitigation plans.
This bill instead would require, after January 1, 2026, local publicly owned electric utilities and electrical cooperatives to prepare and submit to the board wildfire mitigation plans at least once every 4 years on a schedule determined by the board.
Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC is a crime.
Because a violation of a PUC action implementing the requirements of this bill would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment.This bill would require those actions to take into account both the time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.Existing law requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their wildfire mitigation plan to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety for review and approval. Existing law requires the wildfire mitigation plans to include, among other things, a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, and a description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory with the highest wildfire risk, as specified.This bill would revise those wildfire mitigation plan requirements to, among other things, require the preventive strategies and programs to also include consideration of their cost efficiencies, as specified, and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs, require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation, require the presentation of certain cost-efficient measures adopted by the commission, and require the electrical corporation to explain the reasonableness of the mitigation selected in the description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines, as specified. Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.To the extent that the commission would issue an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement to implement this bill, a violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment.
This bill would require those actions to take into account both the time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
Existing law requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their wildfire mitigation plan to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety for review and approval. Existing law requires the wildfire mitigation plans to include, among other things, a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, and a description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory with the highest wildfire risk, as specified.
This bill would revise those wildfire mitigation plan requirements to, among other things, require the preventive strategies and programs to also include consideration of their cost effectiveness, efficiencies, as specified, and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs, require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation, require the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness cost-efficient measures adopted by the commission, and require the electrical corporation to explain the reasonableness of the mitigation selected in the description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines, as specified.
Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.
To the extent that the commission would issue an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement to implement this bill, a violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment.
This bill would require those actions to take into account both the need to minimize those risks as soon as possible time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation. reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
Existing law requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their wildfire mitigation plan to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety for review and approval. Existing law requires the wildfire mitigation plans to include, among other things, a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, and a description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory with the highest wildfire risk, as specified.
This bill would revise those wildfire mitigation plan requirements to, among other things, require the preventive strategies and programs to also include consideration of their cost effectiveness, as specified, and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs, require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation, require the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the commission, and require the electrical corporation to explain the reasonableness of the mitigation selected in the description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines, as specified.
Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.
To the extent that the commission would issue an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement to implement this bill, a violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment.
This bill would require those operations actions to take into account both the need to minimize those risks as soon as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
Existing law requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their wildfire mitigation plan to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety for review and approval. Existing law requires the wildfire mitigation plans to include, among other things, a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a description of the metrics used to evaluate the plans performance and underlying assumptions for the use of those metrics, a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, and a description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory with the highest wildfire risk, as specified.
This bill would revise those wildfire mitigation plan requirements to, among other things, require the preventive strategies and programs to also include consideration of their cost effectiveness, as specified, and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs, require the description of the performance metrics to include a description of how cost effectiveness and variations in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated, require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation, require the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the commission, and, for each undergrounding location, and require the electrical corporation to demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate mitigation measure, explain the reasonableness of the mitigation selected in the description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines, as specified.
Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.
To the extent that the commission would issue an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement to implement this bill, a violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment.
This bill would require those operations to take into account both the need to minimize those risks as soon as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
Existing law requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their wildfire mitigation plan to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety for review and approval. Existing law requires the wildfire mitigation plans to include, among other things, a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a description of the metrics used to evaluate the plans performance and underlying assumptions for the use of those metrics, a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, and a description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory with the highest wildfire risk, as specified.
This bill would revise those wildfire mitigation plan requirements to, among other things, require the preventive strategies and programs to also include consideration of the their cost effectiveness calculated consistent with the commissions requirements effectiveness, as specified, and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs, require the description of the performance metrics to include a description of how cost effectiveness and variations in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated, require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation, require the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the commission, and, for each undergrounding location, require the electrical corporation to demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate mitigation measure, as specified.
Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.
To the extent that the commission would issue an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement to implement this bill, a violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment. Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the Public Utilities Commission is a crime.
This bill would require those operations to take into account the need to minimize those risks as soon as possible. To the extent that the commission issues an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirements to implement this requirement, a violation of which is a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
Existing law requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their wildfire mitigation plan to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety for review and approval. Existing law requires the wildfire mitigation plans to include include, among other things, a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a description of the metrics used to evaluate the plans performance and underlying assumptions for the use of those metrics, and a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory. territory, and a description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory with the highest wildfire risk, as specified.
This bill would revise the requirements of the those wildfire mitigation plan to requirements to, among other things, require the preventive strategies and programs to also include consideration of the cost effectiveness calculated consistent with the commissions requirements and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs, require the description of the performance metrics to include a description of how cost effectiveness and variations in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated, and require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation. corporation, require the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the commission, and, for each undergrounding location, require the electrical corporation to demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate mitigation measure, as specified.
Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.
To the extent that the commission would issue an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement to implement this bill, a violation of which would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment. Under existing law, a violation of an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the Public Utilities Commission is a crime.
This bill would require those operations to take into account the need to minimize those risks as soon as possible. To the extent that the commission issues an order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirements to implement this requirement, a violation of which is a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Existing law requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their wildfire mitigation plan to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety for review and approval. Existing law requires the wildfire mitigation plans to include a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a description of the metrics used to evaluate the plans performance and underlying assumptions for the use of those metrics, and a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory.
This bill would revise the requirements of the wildfire mitigation plan to require the preventive strategies and programs to include consideration of the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs, the description of the performance metrics to include a description of how variations in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated, and the list to include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(a)State agency means any department, division, independent establishment, or agency of the executive branch of the state government.
(b)Political subdivision includes any city, city and county, county, district, or other local governmental agency or public agency authorized by law.
(c)Governing body means the legislative body, trustees, or directors of a political subdivision.
(d)Chief executive means that individual authorized by law to act for the governing body of a political subdivision.
(e)Disaster council and disaster service worker have the meaning prescribed in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 3201) of Part 1 of Division 4 of the Labor Code.
(f)Public facility means any facility of the state or a political subdivision, which facility is owned, operated, or maintained, or any combination thereof, through moneys derived by taxation or assessment.
(g)Sudden and severe energy shortage means a rapid, unforeseen shortage of energy, resulting from, but not limited to, events such as an embargo, sabotage, or natural disasters, and that has statewide, regional, or local impact.
(h)For purposes of this chapter, a deenergization event means a planned power outage, undertaken by an electrical corporation, as defined in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code, to reduce the risk of wildfires caused by utility equipment, pursuant to Public Utilities Commission Resolution ESRB-8 and any decisions issued by the commission, the former Wildfire Safety Division, as set forth in former Section 326 of the Public Utilities Code, the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, or any other agency with authority over electrical corporations. A deenergization event begins when an electrical corporation provides notice to any state agency or political subdivision of the potential need to initiate a planned deenergization of the electrical grid, and ends when the electrical corporation restores electrical services to all deenergized customers, or when the electrical corporation cancels the deenergization event for some or all of its affected customers, and rescinds the notice of the potential need to initiate the deenergization event. A deenergization event does not include any planned outages in connection with regular utility work.
SEC. 2.Section 15472 of the Government Code is amended to read:15472.For purposes of this part: part, the following definitions apply:
(a)Commission means the Public Utilities Commission.
(a)(b)Director means the Director of the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
(c)Electrical corporation has the same meaning as set forth in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code.
(b)(d)Office means Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
(c)Regulated entity means an entity that is regulated by the office.SEC. 3.Section 15473 of the Government Code is amended to read:15473.(a)There is in state government, within the Natural Resources Agency, the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety. The office shall be under the supervision of the Director of the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, who shall have all rights and powers of a head of an office as provided by this code.
(b)The director shall be appointed by, and hold office at the pleasure of, the Governor. The appointment of the director is subject to confirmation by the Senate.
(1)The director shall receive an annual salary as set forth in Section 11552.
(2)The Governor may appoint a deputy director of the office. The deputy director shall hold office at the pleasure of the Governor.
(c)In carrying out the provisions of this part, the director may:
(1)Cooperate and contract with public and private agencies for the performance of acts, the rendition of services, and the affording of facilities as may be necessary and proper.
(2)Do other acts and things as may be necessary and incidental to the exercise of powers and the discharge of duties conferred or imposed by the provisions of this part, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(A)Employ and prescribe duties of staff members as necessary to carry out the duties of the office.
(B)Employ and prescribe duties for staff designated as investigators. The personnel classification of the investigators shall be consistent with the technical qualifications needed to conduct the investigations.(C)Designate staff as compliance officers or hearing examiners.(D)(B)Conduct investigations in any part of the state, compel information, and hold hearings, public meetings, or workshops as necessary to carry out the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the office, consistent with the exercise of its authority pursuant to this part, Section 326 of, part and Sections 8385 to 8389, inclusive, of, Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 8385) of Division 4.1 of the Public Utilities Code, or other statutes pertaining to the office.
(E)(C)Adopt, amend, and repeal regulations as necessary to carry out the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the office, consistent with Section 15475. The adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations shall be deemed to be an emergency and necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, or general welfare.
(F)(D)Require a regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction to file an incident report with the office concerning any matter regulated by the office concerning a regulated entitys infrastructure.
(d)The director and deputy director may administer oaths, certify to all official acts, serve warrants, and issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of papers, including computer modeling, programs, maps, geographic information systems data, and other digital records, waybills, books, accounts, documents, and testimony in any inquiry, investigation, or hearing in any part of the state.
(e)The director has the power of a head of a department pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 11180) of Chapter 2 of Part 1.
SEC. 4.Section 15475 of the Government Code is amended to read:15475.(a)The office is the successor to, and, effective July 1, 2021, is vested with, all of the duties, powers, and responsibilities of the Wildfire Safety Division established pursuant to Section 326 of the Public Utilities Code, including, but not limited to, the power to may compel information and conduct investigations. All laws prescribing the duties, powers, and responsibilities of the Wildfire Safety Division to which the office succeeds, together with all lawful rules and regulations established under those laws, are expressly continued in force. In carrying out its duties, powers, and responsibilities pursuant to this part and Section 326 of, and Sections 8385 to 8389, inclusive, of, Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 8385) of Division 4.1 of the Public Utilities Code, or other statutes pertaining to the office, the following powers, duties, and responsibilities vested in the office are acknowledged and confirmed:
(a)(1)The office shall adopt, amend, or repeal emergency regulations to implement this part in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1). The adoption, amendment, or repeal of these regulations shall be deemed to be an emergency for the purpose of Section 11342.545 and shall be considered by the Office of Administrative Law as necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, or general welfare.
(b)(2)The office may require information and data, including monitoring, verification of every regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction and any business that is a subsidiary or affiliate of a regulated entity with respect to or that may influence any matter concerning wildfire safety, or that is necessary or useful for the office to perform and exercise its duties, powers, and responsibilities.
(c)(3)The office shall provide for the confidentiality of records, the protection of proprietary information, and the protection of the reasonable expectation of customers of public utilities in the privacy of customer-specific records maintained by the regulated entity. entity under the offices jurisdiction. As the successor entity to the former Wildfire Safety Division, the office shall continue to have access to and transfer any confidential information received by the former Wildfire Safety Division under the authority of the Public Utilities Commission to the office consistent with appropriate protections to maintain the confidentiality of that information. The office and the Public Utilities Commission shall agree upon provisions for the transfer of that information.
(d)(4)The office may require the production, within this state, at a time and place as it designates, of any books, accounts, papers, records, including computer modeling, programs, and other digital records, kept by a regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction in any office or place within this state, or, at its option, verified copies in lieu thereof, so that an examination thereof may be made by the office or under its direction to the extent the production of the records relates to an investigation that falls within the duties, powers, and responsibilities of the office.
(e)(5)The office and persons employed by the office, may, at any time, inspect the accounts, books, papers, and documents, including any digital information, of any regulated entity. entity under the offices jurisdiction. The office and any of its designees or employees authorized to administer oaths may examine under oath any officer, agent, or employee of a regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction in relation to its business and affairs concerning matters within the duties, powers, and responsibilities of the office. This subdivision also applies to inspections of the accounts, books, papers, and documents of any business that is a subsidiary or affiliate, or a corporation that holds a controlling interest in a regulated entity that is subject to regulation by the office. under the offices jurisdiction.
(f)(6)Each regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction shall cooperate fully with the office in any investigation conducted consistent with this section, regardless of pending litigation or other investigations, including, but not limited to, those that may be related to investigations conducted by the Public Utilities Commission, or the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The office and the Public Utilities Commission will cooperate and coordinate consistent with the memorandum of understanding required by Section 15476.
(g)(7)Every regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction shall furnish to the office, in the form and detail as the office prescribes, all tabulations, computations, and other information required for the office to perform its duties, powers, and responsibilities, and shall make specific answers to all questions submitted by the office. Every regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction receiving from the office any blanks with directions to fill them shall answer fully and correctly each question propounded to it, and if it is unable to answer any question, it shall give a good and sufficient reason for that failure.
(h)(8)Every regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction shall furnish those reports to the office at the time and in the form as the office may require in which the regulated entity shall specifically answer all questions propounded by the office. The office may require any regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction to file reports or periodic special reports, or both, concerning any matter about which the office is authorized by any law to inquire or to keep itself informed, or that it is required to enforce. All reports shall be under oath when required by the office.
(i)(9)The office and persons employed by or acting on behalf of the office may enter and inspect regulated entity the property, records, and equipment of a regulated entity under the offices jurisdiction at any time and anywhere within the state. Any member of the inspection party may utilize use whatever measurement and evaluation devices, including, but not limited to, photographic equipment and temperature measurement devices, that are determined to be necessary. Documentation of the inspection shall be the property of the office. This subdivision paragraph is not a limitation upon the authority of any agency to inspect pursuant to any other law.
(j)(10)The office and persons employed by or acting on behalf of the office may inspect at any time and anywhere within the state, all regulated entities properties and equipment for purposes of carrying out the duties, powers, and responsibilities of the former Wildfire Safety Division as set forth in this part or Section 326 of, and Sections 8385 to 8389, inclusive, of, Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 8385) of Division 4.1 of the Public Utilities Code, which are vested in the office as the divisions successor, or other statute pertaining to the office.
(b)The office shall do all of the following:
(1)Oversee electrical corporations performance with wildfire safety pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 8385) of Division 4.1 of the Public Utilities Code.
(2)Develop performance metrics to achieve maximum feasible risk reduction to be used to develop the wildfire mitigation plan and evaluate an electrical corporations performance relative to the implementation of that plan. For this purpose, maximum feasible means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors.
(3)Develop a field audit and performance oversight program to assess wildfire mitigation plan implementation by each electrical corporation.
(4)Support efforts to assess and analyze fire weather data and other atmospheric conditions that could lead to catastrophic wildfires and to reduce the likelihood and severity of wildfire incidents that could endanger the safety of persons, properties, and the environment within the state.
(5)Retain appropriate staff that includes experts in wildfire, weather, climate change, emergency response, and other relevant subject matters.
(6)Review, as necessary, in coordination with the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board and necessary commission staff, safety requirements for electrical transmission and distribution infrastructure and infrastructure and equipment attached to that electrical infrastructure, and provide recommendations to the commission to address the dynamic risk of climate change and to mitigate wildfire risk.
SEC. 5.Section 15475.1 of the Government Code is amended to read:15475.1.(a)The office may determine that a regulated entity is not in compliance with any matter under the authority of the office. If necessary, the office may undertake an investigation into whether the regulated entity is noncompliant with its duties and responsibilities or has otherwise committed violations of any laws, regulations, or guidelines within the authority of the office.(b)15475.1.(a)The offices primary objective is to ensure that regulated entities under the offices jurisdiction are reducing wildfire risk and complying with energy infrastructure safety measures as required by law. adhering to their approved wildfire mitigation plans.
(b)The office is charged with assessing and evaluating electrical corporations performance of the mitigation activities and strategies outlined in the wildfire mitigation plans. The office shall assess whether electrical corporations deviate from their plans and evaluate the strength and quality of their performance relative to the plan.
SEC. 6.Section 15475.2 of the Government Code is amended to read:15475.2.(a)(1)The office may issue a notice of defect or violation nonperformance to direct the regulated entity an electrical corporation to correct any defect or noncompliance nonperformance with the approved wildfire mitigation plan or failure to comply with any laws, regulations, or guidelines within the authority of the office. plan.
(2)The notice of nonperformance shall identify deficiencies and may prescribe corrective actions and timelines.
(3)The notice of nonperformance shall be posted on the offices internet website and shall be served electronically on the electrical corporation.
(b)The office shall adopt guidelines pursuant to Section 15475.6 setting forth the policies and procedures for administering the duties of this section.
SEC. 7.Section 15475.4 of the Government Code is repealed.15475.4.(a)A compliance officer designated by the director may issue notices of defect or violation to any regulated entity. The notice of defect or violation shall allege the deficiency, violation, or failure to act. The notice of defect or violation shall be posted on the offices internet website.(b)The notice of defect or violation shall be served electronically on the individual designated by the regulated entity and shall inform the regulated entity so served that a hearing to take public comment or present additional information may be requested by the regulated entity within 30 days after the regulated entity has been served. The hearing shall be presided over by a designated hearing examiner. If a petition for hearing is not filed within the 30-day period, the amount determined and conditions set forth in the citation or notice of defect or violation become final at the expiration of the 30-day period. The hearing process shall be set forth in regulations adopted by the office.(c)If a hearing is requested, after consideration of information presented, the hearing examiner shall issue a proposed determination. The public, stakeholders, and the regulated entity may provide comment on the proposed determination. After considering stakeholder, regulated entity, and public comment, the director may adopt, with or without revision, the proposed determination of the hearing examiner. The director may also reject the proposed determination of the hearing examiner.(d)The office shall adopt regulations setting forth the policies and procedures for administering the duties of this section.SEC. 8.Section 15475.5 of the Government Code is repealed.15475.5.(a)The decisions of the office are subject to judicial review in the superior court. The superior court shall give preference to cases seeking judicial review of decisions of the office over all civil actions or proceedings pending before the superior court. Appeals of the superior courts decision of those cases shall be given preference in hearings before the court of appeal and the Supreme Court.(b)Within 30 days after service of a decision issued by the office pursuant to Section 15475.4, a regulated entity or aggrieved stakeholder may file with the superior court a petition for writ of review. If no petition is filed within the time provided by this section, the determination of the office is not subject to review by any court or agency.(c)The decision of the office shall be sustained by the court unless the court finds that (1) the office proceeded without, or in excess of its jurisdiction, (2) that, based exclusively upon review of the record before the office, the decision is not supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record, or (3) that the office failed to proceed in a manner required by law.SEC. 9.Section 15475.6 of the Government Code is amended to read:15475.6.(a)(1)The office shall adopt guidelines setting forth the requirements, format, timing, and any other matters required to exercise its powers, perform its duties, and meet its responsibilities described in this part and Sections 326, 326.1, 326.1 and 326.2 of, and Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 8385) of Division 4.1 of of, the Public Utilities Code at a publicly noticed meeting during which the office presents proposed guidelines or guideline amendments and allows all interested stakeholders and members of the public an opportunity to comment. Not less than 10 days public notice shall be given of any meetings required by this section, before the office initially adopts guidelines. Substantive changes to the guidelines shall not be adopted without at least 30 days written notice to the public and opportunity to comment. Any guidelines adopted pursuant to this section are exempt from the requirements of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2. Any duly adopted rules or guidelines in effect and utilized by the Wildfire Safety Division at the time of transition to the office shall remain valid and in effect as to the office pending the adoption of new or amended guidelines by the office pursuant to this section. Code.
(2)Before adopting guidelines, the office shall hold at least one public meeting or workshop and allow all interested stakeholders and members of the public an opportunity to comment. Not less than 10 days public notice shall be given of any meetings or workshops required by this section.
(b)Substantive changes to the guidelines shall not be adopted without at least 30 days written notice to the public and opportunity to comment. This notice period may run concurrently with the meeting notice requirements in subdivision (a). If a substantive change is made after the 30-day public comment period and before the adoption of the guidelines, the full text of the resulting guidelines, with the change clearly indicated, shall be made available to the public for comments for at least 10 days before the office adopts the guidelines.
(c)Any guidelines adopted pursuant to this section are exempt from the requirements of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2. Any duly adopted rules or guidelines in effect and used by the former Wildfire Safety Division as of July 1, 2021, shall remain valid and in effect as to the office pending the adoption of new or amended guidelines by the office pursuant to this section.
SEC. 10.Section 326 of the Public Utilities Code is repealed.326.(a) By January 1, 2020, the commission shall establish the Wildfire Safety Division within the commission, located in Sacramento, California. The Wildfire Safety Division shall do all of the following:(1)Oversee and enforce electrical corporations compliance with wildfire safety pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 8385) of Division 4.1.(2)In consultation with the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board, develop and recommend to the commission performance metrics to achieve maximum feasible risk reduction to be used to develop the wildfire mitigation plan and evaluate an electrical corporations compliance with that plan. For this purpose, maximum feasible means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors.(3)Develop a field audit program for wildfire mitigation plan compliance by each electrical corporation.(4)Consult with the Office of Emergency Services in the offices management and response to utility public safety power shutoff events and utility actions for compliance with public safety power shutoff program rules and regulations.(5)Support efforts to assess and analyze fire weather data and other atmospheric conditions that could lead to catastrophic wildfires and to reduce the likelihood and severity of wildfire incidents that could endanger the safety of persons, properties, and the environment within the state.(6)Retain appropriate staff that includes experts in wildfire, weather, climate change, emergency response, and other relevant subject matters.(7)Review, as necessary, in coordination with the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board and necessary commission staff, safety requirements for electrical transmission and distribution infrastructure and infrastructure and equipment attached to that electrical infrastructure, and provide recommendations to the commission to address the dynamic risk of climate change and to mitigate wildfire risk.(b)Effective July 1, 2021, all functions of the Wildfire Safety Division shall be transferred to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety established pursuant to Section 15473 of the Government Code.SEC. 11.Section 326.1 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:326.1.(a)There is hereby established the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board. The board shall advise the Wildfire Safety Division Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety established pursuant to Section 326. 15473 of the Government Code.
(b)The board shall consist of seven members. Five members shall be appointed by the Governor, one member shall be appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly, and one member shall be appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules. The members of the board shall serve four-year staggered terms. The initial members of the board shall be appointed by January 1, 2020. The Governor shall designate three of the initial members who shall serve two-year terms. Members of the board shall be selected from industry experts, academics, and persons with labor and workforce safety experience or other relevant qualifications and shall represent a cross-section of relevant expertise including, at all times, at least three members experienced in the safe operation, design, and engineering of electrical infrastructure.
(c)The board shall meet at least quarterly and alternate meeting locations between northern, central, and southern California, when feasible.
(d)Members of the board who are not salaried state service employees shall be eligible for reasonable compensation, not to exceed a per diem of four hundred dollars ($400), for attendance at board meetings.
(e)All reasonable costs incurred by the board, including staffing, travel at state travel reimbursement rates, and administrative costs, shall be reimbursed through the Public Utilities Commission Utilities Reimbursement Account provided for in Section 402 and shall be part of the budget of the commission. Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety. The commission office shall consult with the board in the preparation of this portion of the commissions offices proposed annual budget.
(f)Communications by the board, its staff, and individual members of the board are not subject to the commissions ex parte rules set forth in Article 1 (commencing with Section 1701) of Chapter 9.
SEC. 12.Section 326.2 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:326.2.The California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board shall do all both of the following:
(a)Develop and make recommendations to the Wildfire Safety Division related to wildfire safety and mitigation performance metrics.(b)Develop and make recommendations related to the contents of wildfire mitigation plans pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 8385) of Division 4.1.(c)(a)Review and provide comments and advisory opinions to each local publicly owned electric utility utilities and electrical cooperative cooperatives regarding the content and sufficiency of its their wildfire mitigation plan plans and recommendations on how to mitigate wildfire risk.
(d)(b)Provide other advice and recommendations related to wildfire safety as requested by the Wildfire Safety Division. Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
SEC. 13.Section 451.1 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:451.1.(a)For purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1)Covered wildfire has the same meaning as defined in Section 1701.8.
(2)Wildfire Fund means the Wildfire Fund created pursuant to Section 3284.
(b)When determining an application by an electrical corporation to recover costs and expenses arising from a covered wildfire, the commission shall allow cost recovery if the costs and expenses are just and reasonable. Costs and expenses arising from a covered wildfire are just and reasonable if the conduct of the electrical corporation related to the ignition was consistent with actions that a reasonable utility would have undertaken in good faith under similar circumstances, at the relevant point in time, and based on the information available to the electrical corporation at the relevant point in time. Reasonable conduct is not limited to the optimum practice, method, or act to the exclusion of others, but rather encompasses a spectrum of possible practices, methods, or acts consistent with utility system needs, the interest of the ratepayers, and the requirements of governmental agencies of competent jurisdiction. Costs and expenses in the application may be allocated for cost recovery in full or in part taking into account factors both within and beyond the utilitys control that may have exacerbated the costs and expenses, including humidity, temperature, and winds.
(c)An electrical corporation bears the burden to demonstrate, based on a preponderance of the evidence, that its conduct was reasonable pursuant to subdivision (b) unless it has a valid safety certification certificate pursuant to Section 8389 for the time period in which the covered wildfire that is the subject of the application ignited. If the electrical corporation has received a valid safety certification certificate for the time period in which the covered wildfire ignited, an electrical corporations conduct shall be deemed to have been reasonable pursuant to subdivision (b) unless a party to the proceeding creates a serious doubt as to the reasonableness of the electrical corporations conduct. Once serious doubt has been raised, the electrical corporation has the burden of dispelling that doubt and proving the conduct to have been reasonable.
(d)If an electrical corporation has drawn amounts from the Wildfire Fund for eligible claims for a covered wildfire, then the electrical corporation shall file an application to recover costs and expenses pursuant to Section 1701.8 after it has paid substantially all third-party liability claims arising from the covered wildfire.
(e)Notwithstanding Section 451, this section shall direct the commissions evaluation of applications for recovery of costs and expenses arising from a covered wildfire. This section shall not apply to any other applications for cost recovery.
(f)This section shall not affect any civil action, appeal, or other action or proceeding.
(g)This section shall become inoperative if Section 3292 becomes inoperative pursuant to subdivision (k) of that section and this section shall be repealed on the first January 1 more than three months after this section becomes inoperative. The commission shall notify the Secretary of State as to whether this section becomes inoperative and is repealed.
SEC. 14.Section 8385 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8385.(a)For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
(1)Compliance period means a period of approximately one year.(2)(1)Deenergization event means the proactive interruption of electrical service for the purpose of mitigating or avoiding the risk of causing a wildfire.
(3)(2)Electrical cooperative has the same meaning as defined in Section 2776.
(3)Electrical corporation has the same meaning as defined in Section 218.
(4)Large electrical corporation has the same meaning as defined in Section 3280.
(5)Local publicly owned electric utility has the same meaning as defined in Section 224.3.
(5)(6)Office means the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, within the Natural Resources Agency.
(7)Independent transmission owner means an electrical corporation that owns a transmission asset that is not required by the commission to seek commission approval for general rate increases.
(b)Beginning July 1, 2021, the office shall supervise oversee an electrical corporations compliance adherence with the requirements of this chapter pursuant to the Public Utilities Act (Part 1 (commencing with Section 201) of Division 1). Nothing in this This chapter affects does not affect the commissions authority or jurisdiction over an electrical corporation, electrical cooperative, independent transmission owner, or local publicly owned electric utility.
SEC. 15.Section 8386 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.(a)Each electrical corporation shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment. equipment, taking into account both the time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
(b)Each electrical corporation shall annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the Wildfire Safety Division for review and approval. In calendar year 2020, and thereafter, the plan shall cover at least a three-year period. The division submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review at least once every four years. The office shall establish a schedule for the submission of subsequent comprehensive wildfire mitigation plans, which may allow for the staggering of compliance evaluation and performance periods for each electrical corporation. In its discretion, the division may allow the annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan; provided, that each electrical corporation shall submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every three years.
(c)(1)Beginning January 1, 2026, each electrical corporation shall submit a preliminary wildfire mitigation plan to the office at the earliest date of one year before the filing of its general rate case application or concurrent with the filing of its Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase application with the commission. The wildfire mitigation plan shall cover the same period as the general rate case period.
(2)Paragraph (1) does not apply to independent transmission owners.
(c)(d)The wildfire mitigation plan shall include all of the following:
(1)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.
(2)The objectives of the plan.
(3)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the electrical corporation to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of dynamic climate change risks.
(4)A description of the metrics the electrical corporation plans to use to evaluate the plans performance measure and track the implementation of the plan and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics.
(5)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous plan performances has informed the plan.
(6)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety. As part of these protocols, each electrical corporation shall include protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the impacts on all of the following:
(A)Critical first responders.
(B)Health and communication infrastructure.
(C)Customers who receive medical baseline allowances pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 739. The electrical corporation may deploy backup electrical resources or provide financial assistance for backup electrical resources to a customer receiving a medical baseline allowance for a customer who meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The customer relies on life-support equipment that operates on electricity to sustain life.
(ii)The customer demonstrates financial need, including through enrollment in the California Alternate Rates for Energy program continued pursuant to Section 739.1.
(iii)The customer is not eligible for backup electrical resources provided through medical services, medical insurance, or community resources.
(D)Subparagraph (C) shall not be construed as preventing does not prevent an electrical corporation from deploying backup electrical resources or providing financial assistance for backup electrical resources under any other authority.
(7)A description of the electrical corporations appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines, including procedures for those customers receiving medical baseline allowances as described in paragraph (6). The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event. The procedures shall comply with any orders of the commission regarding notifications of deenergization events.
(8)Identification of circuits that have frequently been deenergized pursuant to a deenergization event to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken, or planned to be taken, by the electrical corporation to reduce the need for, and impact of, future deenergization of those circuits, including, but not limited to, the estimated annual decline in circuit deenergization and deenergization impact on customers, and replacing, hardening, or undergrounding any portion of the circuit or of upstream transmission or distribution lines.
(9)Plans for vegetation management.
(10)Plans for inspections of the electrical corporations electrical infrastructure.
(11)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for the deenergization of the electrical corporations transmission infrastructure, for instances when the deenergization may impact customers who, or entities that, are dependent upon the infrastructure. The protocols shall comply with any order of the commission regarding deenergization events.
(12)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, including all relevant wildfire risk and risk mitigation information that is part of required by the commissions Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al.) risk-based decisionmaking framework established in commission proceedings A.15-05-002 or R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings, and the Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filings. The list shall include, but not be limited to, both all of the following:
(A)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operations, and maintenance of the electrical corporations equipment and facilities.
(B)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the electrical corporations service territory.
(C)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an electrical corporation within its service territory.
(13)A description of how the plan accounts for the wildfire risk identified in the electrical corporations Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filing. filing, if applicable.
(14)A description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, taking into account the cost and time required to achieve those benefits, and to ensure that its system is prepared for a major event, including hardening and modernizing its infrastructure with improved engineering, system design, standards, equipment, and facilities, such as undergrounding, insulating of distribution wires, and replacing poles. The electrical corporation shall present the cost-efficiency measures adopted by the commission, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the commissions most recent risk-based decisionmaking framework proceeding for at least two reasonable mitigation alternatives for a given identified wildfire risk.
(15)A description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map.
(16)A showing that the electrical corporation has an adequately sized and trained workforce to promptly restore service after a major event, taking into account employees of other utilities pursuant to mutual aid agreements and employees of entities that have entered into contracts with the electrical corporation.
(17)Identification of any geographic area in the electrical corporations service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is currently identified in a commission fire threat map, and where the commission should consider expanding the high fire threat district based on new information or changes in the environment.
(18)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk that is consistent with the methodology used by other electrical corporations unless the commission determines otherwise.
(19)A description of how the plan is consistent with the electrical corporations disaster and emergency preparedness plan prepared pursuant to Section 768.6, including both of the following:
(A)Plans to prepare for, and to restore service after, a wildfire, including workforce mobilization and prepositioning equipment and employees.
(B)Plans for community outreach and public awareness before, during, and after a wildfire, including language notification in English, Spanish, and the top three primary languages used in the state other than English or Spanish, as determined by the commission based on the United States Census data.
(20)A statement of how the electrical corporation will restore service after a wildfire.
(21)Protocols for compliance with requirements adopted by the commission regarding activities to support customers during and after a wildfire, outage reporting, support for low-income customers, billing adjustments, deposit waivers, extended payment plans, suspension of disconnection and nonpayment fees, repair processing and timing, access to electrical corporation representatives, and emergency communications.
(22)A description of the processes and procedures the electrical corporation will use to do all of the following:
(A)Monitor and audit the implementation of the plan.
(B)Identify any deficiencies in the plan or the plans implementation and correct those deficiencies.
(C)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, carried out under the plan and other applicable statutes and commission rules.
(23)Any other information that the Wildfire Safety Division office may require.
(d)(e)The Wildfire Safety Division office shall post all wildfire mitigation plans and annual updates on the commissions internet website before July 1, 2021, and submitted pursuant to this section on the offices internet website beginning July 1, 2021, for no less than two months before the divisions or offices its decision regarding approval of the plan. The division or office shall accept comments on each plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and verify that the plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.
SEC. 16.Section 8386.1 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.1.The commission shall may assess penalties on an electrical corporation that fails to substantially comply with its plan. In determining an appropriate amount of the penalty, the commission shall consider all of the following:
(a)The nature and severity of any noncompliance with the plan, noncompliance, including whether the noncompliance resulted in harm.
(b)The extent to which the commission or office has found that the electrical corporation complied failed to comply with its plans in prior years.
(c)Whether the electrical corporation self-reported the circumstances constituting noncompliance.
(d)Whether the electrical corporation implemented corrective actions with respect to the noncompliance.
(e)Whether the electrical corporation knew or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known of the circumstances constituting noncompliance.
(f)Whether the electrical corporation had previously engaged in conduct of a similar nature that caused significant property damage or injury.
(g)Any other factors established by the commission in a rulemaking proceeding, an order assessing penalties for noncompliance, consistent with this chapter.
SEC. 17.Section 8386.2 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.2.(a)The commission shall require a safety culture assessment of each electrical corporation to be conducted by an independent third-party evaluator. The commission shall set the schedule for each assessment, including updates to the assessment at least every five years. The electrical corporation shall not seek reimbursement for the costs of the assessment from ratepayers.
(b)The office shall conduct a wildfire-focused safety culture assessment of each electrical corporation at least once every two years.
SEC. 18.Section 8386.3 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.3.(a)(1)(A)The Wildfire Safety Division office shall approve or deny each wildfire mitigation plan and update submitted by an electrical corporation within three months of its submission, unless the division makes a written determination, which shall include reasons supporting the determination, that the three-month deadline cannot be met. Each electrical corporations approved plan shall remain in effect until the division approves the electrical corporations subsequent plan. The division within nine months of its submission.
(B)Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), for an electrical corporation that is not an independent transmission owner, the wildfire mitigation plan is subject to approval pursuant to Section 8386.4.
(2)The office shall consult with the Office of the State Fire Marshal on the review of each wildfire mitigation plan and update. In
(3)In rendering its decision, the division office shall consider comments submitted pursuant to subdivision (d) (e) of Section 8386. Before approval, the division office may require modifications of the plan. After approval by the division, the commission shall ratify the action of the division.
(4)The office may extend any deadlines established pursuant to this subdivision. The decision to extend deadlines shall be made in writing and include reasons supporting the determination that the deadline cannot be met.
(5)An approval of a plan pursuant to this section is not a project as defined in Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code, provided that environmental review otherwise required by Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code occurs before any project approval that would authorize physical changes being made to the environment.
(b)The Wildfire Safety Divisions approval of a plan is not a defense to any enforcement action by the office or for a violation of a commission enforcement action, decision, order, or rule.(c)(b)Following approval of a wildfire mitigation plan, the Wildfire Safety Division plan pursuant to subdivision (a) of this section or Section 8386.4, the office shall oversee compliance with the implementation of the plan consistent with all of the following:
(1)Three months after the end of an electrical corporations initial compliance period, as established by the Wildfire Safety Division pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 8386, and annually On or before April 1, 2026, and on or before each April 1 thereafter, each electrical corporation shall file with the division a office a self-evaluation report addressing the electrical corporations compliance with the implementation of its approved plan during the prior calendar year.
(2)(A)Before On or before March 1, 2021, and on or before each March 1 thereafter, the Wildfire Safety Division, office, in consultation with the Office of the State Fire Marshal, shall make available a list of qualified independent evaluators with experience in assessing the safe operation of electrical infrastructure.
(B)(i)Each electrical corporation shall engage an independent evaluator listed pursuant to subparagraph (A) to review and assess the electrical corporations compliance with implementation of its plan. approved plan. The engaged independent evaluator shall consult with, and operate under the direction of, the office. The independent evaluator shall issue a report on or before July 1 of each year in which a report required by paragraph (1) is filed. As a part of the independent evaluators report, the independent evaluator shall determine whether the electrical corporation failed to fund any activities included in its plan.
(ii)The Wildfire Safety Division office shall consider the independent evaluators findings, but the independent evaluators findings are not binding on the division, except as otherwise specified. office.
(iii)The independent evaluators findings shall be used by the Wildfire Safety Division to carry out its obligations under Article 1 (commencing with Section 451) of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 1.(iv)The independent evaluators findings do not apply to events that occurred before the initial plan is approved for the electrical corporation.(3)The commission shall authorize the electrical corporation to recover in rates the costs of the independent evaluator.
(4)The Wildfire Safety Division office shall complete its compliance performance review of an electrical corporations implementation of its plan within 18 months after the submission of the electrical corporations compliance self-evaluation report.
(5)(A)An electrical corporation shall notify the Wildfire Safety Division, within one month after it completes a substantial portion of the vegetation management requirements in its wildfire mitigation plan, of the completion. Upon receiving the notice from the electrical corporation, the division shall, Following the end of the performance period, the office may, consistent with its authority pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 326, promptly audit the (b) of Section 15475 of the Government Code, conduct audits of the vegetation management work performed by, or on behalf of, the electrical corporation. The initial audit shall specify any failure of identify deficiencies in the electrical corporation to fully comply with corporations implementation of the vegetation management requirements commitments in the wildfire mitigation plan. The division office shall provide the initial audit report to the electrical corporation. The electrical corporation shall have a reasonable time, as determined by the division, to correct and eliminate office, to respond to and develop corrective actions for any deficiency specified in the audit. initial audit report.
(B)The Wildfire Safety Division office may engage its own independent evaluator, auditor, who shall be a certified arborist and shall have any other qualifications determined appropriate by the division, office, to conduct the audit specified in subparagraph (A). The independent evaluator auditor shall consult with, and operate under the direction of, the division. office.
(C)Within one year of the expiration of the time period for an electrical corporation to correct and eliminate any deficiency identified in the audit, the independent evaluator shall issue a report to the electrical corporation, the Wildfire Safety Division, and the Safety and Enforcement Division of the commission specifically describing any failure of the electrical corporation to substantially comply with the substantial portion of the vegetation management requirements in the electrical corporations wildfire mitigation plan. The report shall be made publicly available. The Wildfire Safety Division shall include the report in its compliance review prepared pursuant to paragraph (4).(C)Following the expiration of the time period for an electrical corporation to respond to and develop corrective actions for any deficiency identified in the initial audit, the office or the independent auditor shall issue an updated audit report to the electrical corporation identifying any outstanding deficiency in the electrical corporations implementation or planned corrective actions relative to its vegetation management commitments in the electrical corporations wildfire mitigation plan. The report shall be made publicly available. The office shall include, if available, the report in its performance review prepared pursuant to paragraph (4).
(6)Each electrical corporation shall reimburse the Wildfire Safety Division office for the divisions offices costs to implement this section with respect to that electrical corporation.
(d)(c)(1)An electrical corporation shall not divert revenues authorized by the commission to implement the approved wildfire mitigation plan to any programs or activities or investments outside of the plan. plan approved pursuant to Section 8386.4. An electrical corporation shall notify the commission by advice letter of both of the following:
(A)The date when the electrical corporation projects that it will have spent, or incurred obligations to spend, its entire annual revenue requirement for vegetation management in its wildfire mitigation plan not less than 30 days before that date.
(B)A detailed summary of the electrical corporations workforce development efforts completed in compliance with the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(i)A description of and data on the extent to which the electrical corporation advertises job openings to members of California Conservation Corps crews and members of community conservation corps, as defined in Section 14507.5 of the Public Resources Code.
(ii)A description of and data on the extent to which the electrical corporation, in seeking to develop potential members of its workforce, has links to or otherwise works with community-based or other organizations that work with current members of California Conservation Corps crews and current members of community conservation corps, as defined in Section 14507.5 of the Public Resources Code, and formerly incarcerated conservation crew members.
(iii)A description of the extent to which the electrical corporation supports skill-development efforts that would assist current and former members of California Conservation Corps crews, members of community conservation corps, as defined in Section 14507.5 of the Public Resources Code, formerly incarcerated conservation crew members, and others with similar skillsets in acquiring skills needed to complete work on or near electrical facilities. Nothing in this clause alters This clause does not alter the requirements imposed on an employer pursuant to Section 12952 of the Government Code.
(2)An electrical corporation shall provide to the office a copy of the advice letter pursuant to paragraph (1) at the same time the advice letter is submitted to the commission.
(d)This section does not impose any liability on the office regarding the performance of its duties.
(e)The commission shall not allow a large electrical corporation to include in its equity rate base its share, as determined pursuant to the Wildfire Fund allocation metric specified in Section 3280, of the first five billion dollars ($5,000,000,000) expended in aggregate by large electrical corporations on fire risk mitigation capital expenditures included in the electrical corporations approved wildfire mitigation plans. An electrical corporations share of the fire risk mitigation capital expenditures and the debt financing costs of these fire risk mitigation capital expenditures may be financed through a financing order pursuant to Section 850.1 subject to the requirements of that financing order.(f)This section does not impose any liability on the Wildfire Safety Division regarding the performance of its duties.SEC. 19.Section 8386.4 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.4.(a)At the time of approval of an electrical corporations wildfire mitigation plan, the commission shall authorize the electrical corporation to establish a memorandum account to track costs incurred to implement the plan.(b)8386.4.(a)(1)The commission shall consider whether the cost of implementing each electrical corporations plan is just and reasonable in its general rate case application. Each proceeding and shall approve the costs for wildfire risk mitigation programs and activities it determines are just and reasonable.
(2)In the commissions discretion, each electrical corporation shall may establish a memorandum account to track costs incurred for fire wildfire risk mitigation that are not otherwise covered unforeseen and incremental to the wildfire risk mitigation programs and activities authorized in the electrical corporations revenue requirements. The commission shall review the costs in the memorandum accounts and disallow recovery of those costs the commission deems unreasonable.
(2)In lieu of paragraph (1), an electrical corporation may elect to file an application for recovery of the cost of implementing its plan as accounted in the memorandum account at the conclusion of the time period covered by the plan. If the electrical corporation files an application for cost recovery pursuant to this paragraph, the commission shall issue a proposed decision within 12 months of the filing date of the application unless the commission issues an order extending the deadline upon a finding of good cause.(3)The chief executive officer of an electrical corporation shall certify in each general rate case application that the electrical corporation has not received authorization from the commission to recover the costs in a previous proceeding, including wildfire cost recovery applications.
(b)For a general rate case application filed after January 1, 2027, all of the following apply:
(1)The electrical corporation shall file its preliminary wildfire mitigation plan approved pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 8386.3, or, if no plan has been approved by the office, the wildfire mitigation plan filed pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 8386, and any applicable decision from the office, with the general rate case application and shall include testimony establishing the forecast of costs necessary to implement the programs and activities in the plan.
(2)The commission shall consult with the office regarding the programs and activities in the plan in rendering its decision pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a). The commissions decision shall constitute approval of the revenue requirement necessary to implement the electrical corporations wildfire mitigation plan.
(3)Within 45 days of the commissions decision rendered pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) or any commission order modifying that decision, the electrical corporation shall submit a revised wildfire mitigation plan to the office that conforms to the commissions revenue authorization. The office shall review and either approve or request modifications to the revised wildfire mitigation plan submitted in accordance with the revenue authorized pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a). The office shall approve the revised wildfire mitigation plan within two months of submission. After approval by the office, the electrical corporation shall file the approved revised wildfire mitigation plan as an information-only submittal with the commission.
(4)(c)Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as a restriction or limitation on Article 1 (commencing with Section 451) of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 1.
SEC. 20.Section 8386.5 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.5.The commission, the office, and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection shall enter into a memorandum of understanding to cooperatively develop consistent approaches and share data related to fire prevention, safety, vegetation management, and energy distribution systems. The commission commission, the office, and the department shall share results from various fire prevention activities, including relevant inspections and fire ignition data.
SEC. 21.Section 8387 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8387.(a)Each local publicly owned electric utility and electrical cooperative shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment.
(b)(1)The local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative shall, before January 1, 2020, prepare a wildfire mitigation plan. After January 1, 2020, 2026, a local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative shall prepare a wildfire mitigation plan annually and shall submit the plan to the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board on or before July 1 of that calendar year. Each local publicly owned electric utility and electrical cooperative shall update its plan annually and submit the update to the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board by July 1 of each year. At least once every three years, the submission shall be a comprehensive revision of the plan. at least once every four years on a schedule determined by the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board.
(2)The wildfire mitigation plan shall consider as necessary, at minimum, all of the following:
(A)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.
(B)The objectives of the wildfire mitigation plan.
(C)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of dynamic climate change risks.
(D)A description of the metrics the local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative plans to use to evaluate the wildfire mitigation plans performance measure and track the implementation of the plan and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics.
(E)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous wildfire mitigation plan performances has informed the wildfire mitigation plan.
(F)Protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety, as well as and protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of those protocols, including impacts on critical first responders and on health and communication infrastructure.
(G)Appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines. The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event.
(H)Plans for vegetation management.
(I)Plans for inspections of the local publicly owned electric utilitys or electrical cooperatives electrical infrastructure.
(J)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the local publicly owned electric utilitys or electrical cooperatives service territory. The list shall include, but not be limited to, both of the following:
(i)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the local publicly owned electric utilitys or electrical cooperatives equipment and facilities.
(ii)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the local publicly owned electric utilitys or electrical cooperatives service territory.
(K)Identification of any geographic area in the local publicly owned electric utilitys or electrical cooperatives service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is identified in a commission fire threat map, and identification of where the commission should expand a high fire-threat district based on new information or changes to the environment.
(L)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk.
(M)A statement of how the local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative will restore service after a wildfire.
(N)A description of the processes and procedures the local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative shall use to do all of the following:
(i)Monitor and audit the implementation of the wildfire mitigation plan.
(ii)Identify any deficiencies in the wildfire mitigation plan or its implementation, and correct those deficiencies.
(iii)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, that are carried out under the plan, other applicable statutes, or commission rules.
(3)The In each year it is required to submit a plan, the local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative shall, on or before January 1, 2020, and not less than annually thereafter, shall present its wildfire mitigation plan in an appropriately noticed public meeting. The local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative shall accept comments on its wildfire mitigation plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and shall verify that the wildfire mitigation plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.
(c)The local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative shall contract with a qualified independent evaluator with experience in assessing the safe operation of electrical infrastructure to review and assess the comprehensiveness of its wildfire mitigation plan. The independent evaluator shall issue a report that shall be made available on the internet website of the local publicly owned electric utility or electrical cooperative, and shall present the report at a public meeting of the local publicly owned electric utilitys or electrical cooperatives governing board.
SEC. 22.Section 8388.5 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8388.5.(a)The commission shall establish an expedited utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program consistent with this section.
(b)Only a large electrical corporation may participate in the program.
(c)In order to participate in the program, a large electrical corporation shall submit to the office a distribution infrastructure undergrounding plan that shall address or include, at minimum, all of the following components:
(1)A 10-year plan for undergrounding distribution infrastructure.
(2)Identification of the undergrounding projects that will be constructed as part of the program, including a means of prioritizing undergrounding projects based on wildfire risk reduction, public safety, cost efficiency, and reliability benefits. Only undergrounding projects located in tier 2 or 3 high fire-threat districts or rebuild areas may be considered and constructed as part of the program.
(3)Timelines for the completion of identified and prioritized undergrounding projects, and unit cost targets and mileage completion targets for each year covered by the plan.
(4)A comparison of undergrounding versus aboveground hardening of electrical infrastructure and wildfire mitigation for achieving comparable risk reduction, or any other alternative mitigation strategy, such as covered conductor and rapid earth fault current limiter devices, for those prioritized undergrounding projects, evaluating the scope, cost, extent, and risk reduction of each activity, separately and collectively, over the duration of the plan. The comparison shall emphasize risk reduction and include an analysis of the cost of each activity for reducing wildfire risk, separately and collectively, over the duration of the plan.
(5)A plan for utility and contractor workforce development.
(6)An evaluation of project costs, projected economic benefits over the life of the assets, and any cost containment assumptions, including the economies of scale necessary to reduce wildfire risk and mitigation costs and establish a sustainable supply chain.
(d)Upon a large electrical corporation submitting a plan to the office, the office shall do both of the following:
(1)Publish the plan for public comment.
(2)Within nine months, review and approve or deny the plan. The office may only approve the plan if the large electrical corporation has shown that the plan will substantially increase electrical reliability by reducing the use of public safety power shutoffs, enhanced powerline safety settings, deenergization events, and any other outage programs, and substantially reduce the risk of wildfire. Before approving the plan, the office may require the large electrical corporation to modify the plan or to modify and resubmit the plan.
(e)(1)Upon the office approving a plan pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d), the large electrical corporation shall, within 60 days, submit to the commission a copy of the plan and an application requesting review and conditional approval of the plans costs and including all of the following:
(A)Any substantial improvements in safety risk and reduction in costs compared to other hardening and risk mitigation measures over the duration of the plan.
(B)The cost targets, at a minimum, that result in feasible and attainable cost reductions as compared to the large electrical corporations historical undergrounding costs.
(C)How the cost targets are expected to decline over time due to cost efficiencies and economies of scale.
(D)A strategy for achieving cost reductions over time.
(2)The assigned commissioner may waive the requirements of subdivisions (b), (d), (f), and (i) of Section 1701.3 for an application submitted to the commission pursuant to paragraph (1).
(3)In reviewing an application submitted to the commission pursuant to paragraph (1), the commission shall consider not revisiting cost or mileage completion targets approved, or pending approval, in the electrical corporations general rate case or a commission-approved balancing account ratemaking mechanism for system hardening.
(4)Upon the commission receiving an application pursuant to paragraph (1), the commission shall facilitate a public workshop for presentation of the plan and take public comment for at least 30 days.
(5)On or before nine months, the commission shall review and approve or deny the application. Before approving the application, the commission may require the large electrical corporation to modify or modify and resubmit the application.
(6)The commission shall consider continuing an existing commission-approved balancing account ratemaking mechanism for system hardening for the duration of a plan, as determined by the commission, and shall authorize recovery of recorded costs that are determined to be just and reasonable.
(f)If the plan is approved by the office and commission, the large electrical corporation shall do all of the following:
(1)Every six months, file a progress report with the office and the commission. The large electrical corporation and the office shall publish these progress reports on their internet websites.
(2)Include ongoing work plans and progress in annual wildfire mitigation plan filings.
(3)Hire an independent monitor, selected by the office, to review and assess the large electrical corporations compliance with adherence to its plan and submit a report with the office each December 1 over the course of the plan.
(g)(1)In reviewing and assessing the large electrical corporations compliance with adherence to its plan pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (f), the independent monitor shall assess whether the large electrical corporations progress on undergrounding work has been consistent with the objectives identified in its plan. The independent monitors report shall specify any failure, delays, or shortcomings of the large electrical corporation and provide recommendations for improvements to accomplish the objectives set forth in the plan.
(2)The large electrical corporation shall have 180 days to correct and eliminate any deficiency specified in the independent monitors report.
(3)On or before December 1 of each year the plan is in effect, the independent monitor shall submit the report to the office.
(h)The office shall publish reports received pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (g) on its internet website.
(i)(1)The office shall consider the independent monitors report and whether the large electrical corporation has cured any deficiencies, and may recommend penalties to the commission. provide an assessment to the commission for consideration.
(2)The commission may assess penalties on a large electrical corporation that fails to substantially comply with a commission decision approving its plan.
(j)Each large electrical corporation participating in the program shall apply for available federal, state, and other nonratepayer moneys throughout the duration of its approved undergrounding plan, and any moneys received as a result of those applications shall be used to reduce the programs costs on the large electrical corporations ratepayers.
(k)An approval of a plan pursuant to this section is not a project as defined in Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code, provided that environmental review otherwise required by Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code occurs before any project approval that would authorize physical changes being made to the environment.
SEC. 23.Section 8389 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8389.(a)For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:(1)Board means the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board established pursuant to Section 326.1.(2)Division means the Wildfire Safety Division established pursuant to Section 326.(3)Office means the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, within the Natural Resources Agency.(b)By June 30, 2020, and annually thereafter, the board shall make recommendations to the division on all of the following:(1)Appropriate performance metrics and processes for determining an electrical corporations compliance with its approved wildfire mitigation plan.(2)Appropriate requirements in addition to the requirements set forth in Section 8386 for the wildfire mitigation plan.(3)The appropriate scope and process for assessing the safety culture of an electrical corporation.(c)By October 31, 2020, and annually thereafter, the division shall issue an analysis and recommendation to the commission on the recommendations provided by the board pursuant to subdivision (b).(d)By December 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, the commission, after consultation with the division, shall adopt and approve all of the following:(1)Performance metrics for electrical corporations.(2)Additional requirements for wildfire mitigation plans.(3)A wildfire mitigation plan compliance process.(4)A process for the division to conduct annual safety culture assessments for each electrical corporation.(e)8389.(a)The Director of the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety shall issue a safety certification certificate to an electrical corporation if the electrical corporation provides documentation of the following:
(1)The electrical corporation has an approved wildfire mitigation plan. plan pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 8386.3.
(2)The electrical corporation is in good standing, which can be satisfied by the electrical corporation having has agreed to implement the findings recommendations of its most recent safety culture assessment assessments performed pursuant to Section 8386.2 and paragraph (4) of subdivision (d), 8386.2, if applicable.
(3)The electrical corporation has established a safety committee of its board of directors composed of members with relevant safety experience.
(4)The electrical corporation has established an executive incentive compensation structure approved by the division office and structured to promote safety as a priority and to ensure public safety and utility financial stability with performance metrics, including incentive compensation based on meeting performance metrics that are measurable and enforceable, for all executive officers, as defined in Section 451.5. This may include tying 100 percent of incentive compensation to safety performance and denying all incentive compensation in the event the electrical corporation causes a catastrophic wildfire that results in one or more fatalities.
(5)The electrical corporation has established board-of-director-level reporting to the commission and office on safety issues.
(6)(A)The electrical corporation has established a compensation structure for any new or amended contracts contracts, plans, or arrangements, whether written or unwritten, for executive officers, as defined in Section 451.5, that is based on the following principles:
(i)(I)Strict limits on guaranteed cash compensation, with the primary portion of the executive officers compensation based on achievement of objective performance metrics.
(II)No guaranteed monetary incentives in the compensation structure.
(ii)It satisfies the compensation principles identified in paragraph (4).
(iii)A long-term structure that provides a significant portion of compensation, which may take the form of grants of the electrical corporations stock, based on the electrical corporations long-term performance and value. This compensation shall be held or deferred for a period of at least three years.
(iv)Minimization or elimination of indirect or ancillary compensation that is not aligned with shareholder and taxpayer interest in the electrical corporation.
(B)The division office shall approve the compensation structure of an electrical corporation if it determines the structure meets the principles set forth in subparagraph (A) and paragraph (4).
(C)It is the intent of the Legislature, in enacting this paragraph and paragraph (4), that any approved bankruptcy reorganization plan of an electrical corporation should, in regards to compensation for executive officers of the electrical corporation, comply with the requirements of those paragraphs.
(7)The electrical corporation is implementing the mitigation strategies in its approved wildfire mitigation plan. The electrical corporation shall file a notification of implementation of its wildfire mitigation plan with the office and an information-only submittal with the commission on a quarterly basis that details the implementation of both its approved wildfire mitigation plan and recommendations of the most recent safety culture assessments by the commission and office, and a statement of the recommendations of the board of directors safety committee meetings that occurred during the quarter. The notification and information-only submittal shall also summarize the implementation of the safety committee recommendations from the electrical corporations previous notification and submission. If the office has reason to doubt the veracity of the statements contained in the notification or information-only submittal, it shall perform an audit of the issue of concern. The electrical corporation shall provide a copy of the information-only submittal to the office.
(f)(1)The office shall issue an initial safety certification within 30 days of receipt of a request for that certification by an electrical corporation if the electrical corporation provides documentation that it is meeting the requirements set forth in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (5) of subdivision (e). A safety certification(b)(1)A certificate shall be valid for the 12 consecutive months following the issuance of the certification. certificate.
(2)(A)Before the expiration of a certification, certificate, an electrical corporation shall submit to the division office a request for certification a certificate for the following 12 months. The division office shall issue a safety certification certificate within 90 days of a request if the electrical corporation has provided documentation that it has satisfied the requirements in subdivision (e). (a).
(B)The office may, for good cause, in writing, extend the 90-day period.
(3)All documents submitted pursuant to this section shall be publicly available on the commissions and the offices internet website. Beginning July 1, 2021, all documents submitted pursuant to this section shall be publicly available on the offices internet website. The commission is no longer responsible for posting this information as of July 1, 2021; however, nothing in this section prevents the commission from posting this information. websites.
(4)(A)Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a safety certification certificate shall remain valid until the division office acts on the electrical corporations pending request for safety certification. a certificate.
(g)If the division determines an electrical corporation is not in compliance with its approved wildfire mitigation plan, it may recommend that the commission pursue an enforcement action against the electrical corporation for noncompliance with its approved plan.(B)The office may extend the expiration date of a certificate if the office or the commission has not yet acted on an element of the certificate request required pursuant to subdivision (a).
SEC. 24.Section 351 of the Water Code is amended to read:351.(a)Except in the event of a wildfire, deenergization event, or a breakage or failure of a dam, pump, pipeline, or conduit causing an immediate emergency, the governing body of a public water supplier shall make a declaration pursuant to Section 350 only after a public hearing at which consumers of the water supply shall have an opportunity to be heard to protest the declaration and to present their respective needs to the governing board.
(b)For purposes of this section, a deenergization event means a planned power outage, undertaken by an electrical corporation, as defined in Section 218 of the Public Utilities Code, to reduce the risk of wildfires caused by utility equipment, pursuant to Public Utilities Commission Resolution ESRB-8 and any decisions issued by the commission, the former Wildfire Safety Division, as set forth in former Section 326 of the Public Utilities Code, the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, or any other agency with authority over electrical corporations. A deenergization event commences when an electrical corporation provides notice to any state agency or political subdivision of the potential need to initiate a planned deenergization of the electrical grid, and ceases when the electrical corporation restores electrical services to all deenergized customers, or at such time as the electrical corporation cancels the deenergization event for some or all of its affected customers, and rescinds the notice of the potential need to initiate the deenergization event. A deenergization event does not include any planned outages in connection with regular utility work.
SEC. 25.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
SECTION 1.The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a)Electrical corporations infrastructure has, over the past 10 years, been the cause of the most destructive wildfires in California history.(b)Electrical corporations are required to develop and submit wildfire mitigation plans each year for review and approval to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.(c)Wildfire mitigation plans and consequent investment have been a contributing factor to recent rate increases for California electricity consumers.(d)Wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations propose a variety of strategies to reduce the chance of wildfire ignitions caused by equipment owned and operated by electrical corporations in California.(e)These strategies vary widely in the amount of time they take to implement, from weeks to up to a decade, during which California residents may face ongoing exposure to risks from wildfire.(f)These strategies vary widely in the cost to implement, the cost efficiency of reducing wildfire ignition risk, and impacts to electricity service reliability.(g)The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety and the Public Utilities Commission do not currently balance the value of mitigations with the time necessary to implement mitigations.(h)Balancing the time value of reduced exposure to wildfire risk and the cost efficiency of mitigations into wildfire safety planning and the cost-approval processes for electrical corporations may both improve safety outcomes and reduce costs for California ratepayers. SEC. 2.Section 8386 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.(a)Each electrical corporation shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment, taking into account both the time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.(b)Each electrical corporation shall annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review and approval. In calendar year 2020, and thereafter, the plan shall cover at least a three-year period. The office shall establish a schedule for the submission of subsequent comprehensive wildfire mitigation plans, which may allow for the staggering of compliance periods for each electrical corporation. In its discretion, the office may allow the annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan; provided, that each electrical corporation shall submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every three years.(c)The wildfire mitigation plan shall include all of the following:(1)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.(2)The objectives of the plan.(3)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the electrical corporation to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of their cost efficiency, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings), the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for preventative strategies and programs, and dynamic climate change risks.(4)A description of the metrics the electrical corporation plans to use to evaluate the plans performance and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics.(5)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous plan performances has informed the plan.(6)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety. As part of these protocols, each electrical corporation shall include protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the impacts on all of the following:(A)Critical first responders.(B)Health and communication infrastructure.(C)Customers who receive medical baseline allowances pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 739. The electrical corporation may deploy backup electrical resources or provide financial assistance for backup electrical resources to a customer receiving a medical baseline allowance for a customer who meets all of the following requirements:(i)The customer relies on life-support equipment that operates on electricity to sustain life.(ii)The customer demonstrates financial need, including through enrollment in the California Alternate Rates for Energy program continued pursuant to Section 739.1.(iii)The customer is not eligible for backup electrical resources provided through medical services, medical insurance, or community resources.(D)Subparagraph (C) does not prevent an electrical corporation from deploying backup electrical resources or providing financial assistance for backup electrical resources under any other authority.(7)A description of the electrical corporations appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines, including procedures for those customers receiving medical baseline allowances as described in paragraph (6). The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event. The procedures shall comply with any orders of the commission regarding notifications of deenergization events.(8)Identification of circuits that have frequently been deenergized pursuant to a deenergization event to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken, or planned to be taken, by the electrical corporation to reduce the need for, and impact of, future deenergization of those circuits, including, but not limited to, the estimated annual decline in circuit deenergization and deenergization impact on customers, and replacing, hardening, or undergrounding any portion of the circuit or of upstream transmission or distribution lines.(9)Plans for vegetation management.(10)Plans for inspections of the electrical corporations electrical infrastructure.(11)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for the deenergization of the electrical corporations transmission infrastructure, for instances when the deenergization may impact customers who, or entities that, are dependent upon the infrastructure. The protocols shall comply with any order of the commission regarding deenergization events.(12)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, including all relevant wildfire risk and risk mitigation information that is part of the commissions then applicable Safety Model Assessment Proceeding and the Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filings. The list shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:(A)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operations, and maintenance of the electrical corporations equipment and facilities.(B)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the electrical corporations service territory.(C)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an electrical corporation within its service territory.(13)A description of how the plan accounts for the wildfire risk identified in the electrical corporations Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filing.(14)A description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, taking into account the cost and time required to achieve those benefits, and to ensure that its system is prepared for a major event, including hardening and modernizing its infrastructure with improved engineering, system design, standards, equipment, and facilities, such as undergrounding, insulating of distribution wires, and replacing poles. The electrical corporation shall present the cost-efficient measures adopted by the commission, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding for at least two reasonable mitigation alternatives for a given identified wildfire risk.(15)A description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map. The electrical corporation shall explain the reasonableness of the mitigation selected, taking into account the cost efficiency, reliability impacts, and time required for installation compared to other alternatives.(16)A showing that the electrical corporation has an adequately sized and trained workforce to promptly restore service after a major event, taking into account employees of other utilities pursuant to mutual aid agreements and employees of entities that have entered into contracts with the electrical corporation.(17)Identification of any geographic area in the electrical corporations service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is currently identified in a commission fire threat map, and where the commission should consider expanding the high fire threat district based on new information or changes in the environment.(18)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk that is consistent with the methodology used by other electrical corporations unless the commission determines otherwise.(19)A description of how the plan is consistent with the electrical corporations disaster and emergency preparedness plan prepared pursuant to Section 768.6, including both of the following:(A)Plans to prepare for, and to restore service after, a wildfire, including workforce mobilization and prepositioning equipment and employees.(B)Plans for community outreach and public awareness before, during, and after a wildfire, including language notification in English, Spanish, and the top three primary languages used in the state other than English or Spanish, as determined by the commission based on the United States Census data.(20)A statement of how the electrical corporation will restore service after a wildfire.(21)Protocols for compliance with requirements adopted by the commission regarding activities to support customers during and after a wildfire, outage reporting, support for low-income customers, billing adjustments, deposit waivers, extended payment plans, suspension of disconnection and nonpayment fees, repair processing and timing, access to electrical corporation representatives, and emergency communications.(22)A description of the processes and procedures the electrical corporation will use to do all of the following:(A)Monitor and audit the implementation of the plan.(B)Identify any deficiencies in the plan or the plans implementation and correct those deficiencies.(C)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, carried out under the plan and other applicable statutes and commission rules.(23)Any other information that the office may require.(d)The office shall post all wildfire mitigation plans and annual updates on the offices internet website for no less than two months before the offices decision regarding approval of the plan. The office shall accept comments on each plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and verify that the plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Electrical corporations infrastructure has, over the past 10 years, been the cause of the most destructive wildfires in California history.
(b)Electrical corporations are required to develop and submit wildfire mitigation plans each year for review and approval to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
(c)Wildfire mitigation plans and consequent investment have been a contributing factor to recent rate increases for California electricity consumers.
(d)Wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations propose a variety of strategies to reduce the chance of wildfire ignitions caused by equipment owned and operated by electrical corporations in California.
(e)These strategies vary widely in the amount of time they take to implement, from weeks to up to a decade, during which California residents may face ongoing exposure to risks from wildfire.
(f)These strategies vary widely in the cost to implement, the cost effectiveness efficiency of reducing wildfire ignition risk, and impacts to electricity service reliability.
(g)The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety and the Public Utilities Commission do not currently balance the value of mitigations with the time necessary to implement mitigations.
(h)Balancing the time value of reduced exposure to wildfire risk and the cost effectiveness efficiency of mitigations into wildfire safety planning and the cost-approval processes for electrical corporations may both improve safety outcomes and reduce costs for California ratepayers.
SEC. 2.Section 8386 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.(a)Each electrical corporation shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment, taking into account both the time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
(b)Each electrical corporation shall annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review and approval. In calendar year 2020, and thereafter, the plan shall cover at least a three-year period. The office shall establish a schedule for the submission of subsequent comprehensive wildfire mitigation plans, which may allow for the staggering of compliance periods for each electrical corporation. In its discretion, the office may allow the annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan; provided, that each electrical corporation shall submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every three years.
(c)The wildfire mitigation plan shall include all of the following:
(1)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.
(2)The objectives of the plan.
(3)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the electrical corporation to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of their cost effectiveness, efficiency, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings), the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for preventative strategies and programs, and dynamic climate change risks.
(4)A description of the metrics the electrical corporation plans to use to evaluate the plans performance and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics.
(5)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous plan performances has informed the plan.
(6)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety. As part of these protocols, each electrical corporation shall include protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the impacts on all of the following:
(A)Critical first responders.
(B)Health and communication infrastructure.
(C)Customers who receive medical baseline allowances pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 739. The electrical corporation may deploy backup electrical resources or provide financial assistance for backup electrical resources to a customer receiving a medical baseline allowance for a customer who meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The customer relies on life-support equipment that operates on electricity to sustain life.
(ii)The customer demonstrates financial need, including through enrollment in the California Alternate Rates for Energy program continued pursuant to Section 739.1.
(iii)The customer is not eligible for backup electrical resources provided through medical services, medical insurance, or community resources.
(D)Subparagraph (C) does not prevent an electrical corporation from deploying backup electrical resources or providing financial assistance for backup electrical resources under any other authority.
(7)A description of the electrical corporations appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines, including procedures for those customers receiving medical baseline allowances as described in paragraph (6). The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event. The procedures shall comply with any orders of the commission regarding notifications of deenergization events.
(8)Identification of circuits that have frequently been deenergized pursuant to a deenergization event to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken, or planned to be taken, by the electrical corporation to reduce the need for, and impact of, future deenergization of those circuits, including, but not limited to, the estimated annual decline in circuit deenergization and deenergization impact on customers, and replacing, hardening, or undergrounding any portion of the circuit or of upstream transmission or distribution lines.
(9)Plans for vegetation management.
(10)Plans for inspections of the electrical corporations electrical infrastructure.
(11)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for the deenergization of the electrical corporations transmission infrastructure, for instances when the deenergization may impact customers who, or entities that, are dependent upon the infrastructure. The protocols shall comply with any order of the commission regarding deenergization events.
(12)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, including all relevant wildfire risk and risk mitigation information that is part of the commissions then applicable Safety Model Assessment Proceeding and the Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filings. The list shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operations, and maintenance of the electrical corporations equipment and facilities.
(B)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the electrical corporations service territory.
(C)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an electrical corporation within its service territory.
(13)A description of how the plan accounts for the wildfire risk identified in the electrical corporations Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filing.
(14)A description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, taking into account the cost and time required to achieve those benefits, and to ensure that its system is prepared for a major event, including hardening and modernizing its infrastructure with improved engineering, system design, standards, equipment, and facilities, such as undergrounding, insulating of distribution wires, and replacing poles. The electrical corporation shall present the cost-effectiveness cost-efficient measures adopted by the commission, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding for at least two reasonable mitigation alternatives for a given identified wildfire risk.
(15)A description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map. The electrical corporation shall explain the reasonableness of the mitigation selected, taking into account the cost-effectiveness, cost efficiency, reliability impacts, and time required for installation compared to other alternatives.
(16)A showing that the electrical corporation has an adequately sized and trained workforce to promptly restore service after a major event, taking into account employees of other utilities pursuant to mutual aid agreements and employees of entities that have entered into contracts with the electrical corporation.
(17)Identification of any geographic area in the electrical corporations service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is currently identified in a commission fire threat map, and where the commission should consider expanding the high fire threat district based on new information or changes in the environment.
(18)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk that is consistent with the methodology used by other electrical corporations unless the commission determines otherwise.
(19)A description of how the plan is consistent with the electrical corporations disaster and emergency preparedness plan prepared pursuant to Section 768.6, including both of the following:
(A)Plans to prepare for, and to restore service after, a wildfire, including workforce mobilization and prepositioning equipment and employees.
(B)Plans for community outreach and public awareness before, during, and after a wildfire, including language notification in English, Spanish, and the top three primary languages used in the state other than English or Spanish, as determined by the commission based on the United States Census data.
(20)A statement of how the electrical corporation will restore service after a wildfire.
(21)Protocols for compliance with requirements adopted by the commission regarding activities to support customers during and after a wildfire, outage reporting, support for low-income customers, billing adjustments, deposit waivers, extended payment plans, suspension of disconnection and nonpayment fees, repair processing and timing, access to electrical corporation representatives, and emergency communications.
(22)A description of the processes and procedures the electrical corporation will use to do all of the following:
(A)Monitor and audit the implementation of the plan.
(B)Identify any deficiencies in the plan or the plans implementation and correct those deficiencies.
(C)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, carried out under the plan and other applicable statutes and commission rules.
(23)Any other information that the office may require.
(d)The office shall post all wildfire mitigation plans and annual updates on the offices internet website for no less than two months before the offices decision regarding approval of the plan. The office shall accept comments on each plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and verify that the plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Electrical corporations infrastructure has, over the past 10 years, been the cause of the most destructive wildfires in California history.
(b)Electrical corporations are required to develop and submit wildfire mitigation plans each year for review and approval to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
(c)Wildfire mitigation plans and consequent investment have been a contributing factor to recent rate increases for California electricity consumers.
(d)Wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations propose a variety of strategies to reduce the chance of wildfire ignitions caused by equipment owned and operated by electrical corporations in California.
(e)These strategies vary widely in the amount of time they take to implement, from weeks to up to a decade, during which California residents may face ongoing exposure to risks from wildfire.
(f)These strategies vary widely in the cost to implement, the cost effectiveness of reducing wildfire ignition risk, and impacts to electricity service reliability.
(g)The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety and the Public Utilities Commission do not currently balance the value of mitigations with the time necessary to implement mitigations.
(h)Balancing the time value of reduced exposure to wildfire risk and the cost effectiveness of mitigations into wildfire safety planning and the cost-approval processes for electrical corporations may both improve safety outcomes and reduce costs for California ratepayers.
SEC. 2.Section 8386 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.(a)Each electrical corporation shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment, taking into account both the need to minimize these risks as quickly as possible time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation. reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
(b)Each electrical corporation shall annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review and approval. In calendar year 2020, and thereafter, the plan shall cover at least a three-year period. The office shall establish a schedule for the submission of subsequent comprehensive wildfire mitigation plans, which may allow for the staggering of compliance periods for each electrical corporation. In its discretion, the office may allow the annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan; provided, that each electrical corporation shall submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every three years.
(c)The wildfire mitigation plan shall include all of the following:
(1)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.
(2)The objectives of the plan.
(3)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the electrical corporation to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of their cost effectiveness, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings), the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for preventative strategies and programs, and dynamic climate change risks.
(4)A description of the metrics the electrical corporation plans to use to evaluate the plans performance and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics.
(5)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous plan performances has informed the plan.
(6)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety. As part of these protocols, each electrical corporation shall include protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the impacts on all of the following:
(A)Critical first responders.
(B)Health and communication infrastructure.
(C)Customers who receive medical baseline allowances pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 739. The electrical corporation may deploy backup electrical resources or provide financial assistance for backup electrical resources to a customer receiving a medical baseline allowance for a customer who meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The customer relies on life-support equipment that operates on electricity to sustain life.
(ii)The customer demonstrates financial need, including through enrollment in the California Alternate Rates for Energy program continued pursuant to Section 739.1.
(iii)The customer is not eligible for backup electrical resources provided through medical services, medical insurance, or community resources.
(D)Subparagraph (C) does not prevent an electrical corporation from deploying backup electrical resources or providing financial assistance for backup electrical resources under any other authority.
(7)A description of the electrical corporations appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines, including procedures for those customers receiving medical baseline allowances as described in paragraph (6). The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event. The procedures shall comply with any orders of the commission regarding notifications of deenergization events.
(8)Identification of circuits that have frequently been deenergized pursuant to a deenergization event to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken, or planned to be taken, by the electrical corporation to reduce the need for, and impact of, future deenergization of those circuits, including, but not limited to, the estimated annual decline in circuit deenergization and deenergization impact on customers, and replacing, hardening, or undergrounding any portion of the circuit or of upstream transmission or distribution lines.
(9)Plans for vegetation management.
(10)Plans for inspections of the electrical corporations electrical infrastructure.
(11)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for the deenergization of the electrical corporations transmission infrastructure, for instances when the deenergization may impact customers who, or entities that, are dependent upon the infrastructure. The protocols shall comply with any order of the commission regarding deenergization events.
(12)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, including all relevant wildfire risk and risk mitigation information that is part of the commissions then applicable Safety Model Assessment Proceeding and the Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filings. The list shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operations, and maintenance of the electrical corporations equipment and facilities.
(B)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the electrical corporations service territory.
(C)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an electrical corporation within its service territory.
(13)A description of how the plan accounts for the wildfire risk identified in the electrical corporations Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filing.
(14)A description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, taking into account the cost and time required to achieve those benefits, and to ensure that its system is prepared for a major event, including hardening and modernizing its infrastructure with improved engineering, system design, standards, equipment, and facilities, such as undergrounding, insulating of distribution wires, and replacing poles. The electrical corporation shall present the cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the commission, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding for at least two reasonable mitigation alternatives for a given identified wildfire risk.
(15)A description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map. The electrical corporation shall explain the reasonableness of the mitigation selected, taking into account the cost effectiveness cost-effectiveness, reliability impacts, and time required for installation compared to other alternatives.
(16)A showing that the electrical corporation has an adequately sized and trained workforce to promptly restore service after a major event, taking into account employees of other utilities pursuant to mutual aid agreements and employees of entities that have entered into contracts with the electrical corporation.
(17)Identification of any geographic area in the electrical corporations service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is currently identified in a commission fire threat map, and where the commission should consider expanding the high fire threat district based on new information or changes in the environment.
(18)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk that is consistent with the methodology used by other electrical corporations unless the commission determines otherwise.
(19)A description of how the plan is consistent with the electrical corporations disaster and emergency preparedness plan prepared pursuant to Section 768.6, including both of the following:
(A)Plans to prepare for, and to restore service after, a wildfire, including workforce mobilization and prepositioning equipment and employees.
(B)Plans for community outreach and public awareness before, during, and after a wildfire, including language notification in English, Spanish, and the top three primary languages used in the state other than English or Spanish, as determined by the commission based on the United States Census data.
(20)A statement of how the electrical corporation will restore service after a wildfire.
(21)Protocols for compliance with requirements adopted by the commission regarding activities to support customers during and after a wildfire, outage reporting, support for low-income customers, billing adjustments, deposit waivers, extended payment plans, suspension of disconnection and nonpayment fees, repair processing and timing, access to electrical corporation representatives, and emergency communications.
(22)A description of the processes and procedures the electrical corporation will use to do all of the following:
(A)Monitor and audit the implementation of the plan.
(B)Identify any deficiencies in the plan or the plans implementation and correct those deficiencies.
(C)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, carried out under the plan and other applicable statutes and commission rules.
(23)Any other information that the office may require.
(d)The Wildfire Safety Division office shall post all wildfire mitigation plans and annual updates on the commissions internet website before July 1, 2021, and on the offices internet website beginning July 1, 2021, for no less than two months before the divisions or offices decision regarding approval of the plan. The division or office shall accept comments on each plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and verify that the plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Electrical corporations infrastructure has, over the past 10 years, been the cause of the most destructive wildfires in California history.
(b)Electrical corporations are required to develop and submit wildfire mitigation plans each year for review and approval to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
(c)Wildfire mitigation plans and consequent investment have been a major cause of contributing factor to recent rate increases for California electricity consumers.
(d)Wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations propose a variety of strategies to reduce the chance of wildfire ignitions caused by equipment owned and operated by electrical corporations in California.
(e)These strategies vary widely in the amount of time they take to implement, from weeks to up to a decade, during which California residents may face ongoing exposure to risks from wildfire.
(f)These strategies vary widely in the cost to implement, the cost effectiveness of reducing wildfire ignition risk, and impacts to electricity service reliability.
(g)The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety and the Public Utilities Commission do not currently incorporate the greater balance the value of mitigations that can be implemented sooner and so reduce California residents exposure to wildfire ignitions from electrical infrastructure owned by electrical corporations sooner. with the time necessary to implement mitigations.
(h)Many of the wildfire mitigation measures to reduce utility wildfire ignition risk that take the longest to implement may also be the most expensive to implement for current electrical utility customers.(i)Incorporating(h)Balancing the time value of reduced exposure to wildfire risk and the cost effectiveness of mitigations into wildfire safety planning and the cost-approval processes for electrical corporations may both improve safety outcomes and reduce costs for California ratepayers.
SEC. 2.Section 8386 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.(a)Each electrical corporation shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment, taking into account both the need to minimize these risks as quickly as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
(b)Each electrical corporation shall annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review and approval. In calendar year 2020, and thereafter, the plan shall cover at least a three-year period. The office shall establish a schedule for the submission of subsequent comprehensive wildfire mitigation plans, which may allow for the staggering of compliance periods for each electrical corporation. In its discretion, the office may allow the annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan; provided, that each electrical corporation shall submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every three years.
(c)The wildfire mitigation plan shall include all of the following:
(1)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.
(2)The objectives of the plan.
(3)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the electrical corporation to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of their cost effectiveness, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings), the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for preventative strategies and programs, and dynamic climate change risks.
(4)A description of the metrics the electrical corporation plans to use to evaluate the plans performance and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics, including a description of how cost effectiveness and the variation in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated into these metrics.
(5)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous plan performances has informed the plan.
(6)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety. As part of these protocols, each electrical corporation shall include protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the impacts on all of the following:
(A)Critical first responders.
(B)Health and communication infrastructure.
(C)Customers who receive medical baseline allowances pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 739. The electrical corporation may deploy backup electrical resources or provide financial assistance for backup electrical resources to a customer receiving a medical baseline allowance for a customer who meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The customer relies on life-support equipment that operates on electricity to sustain life.
(ii)The customer demonstrates financial need, including through enrollment in the California Alternate Rates for Energy program continued pursuant to Section 739.1.
(iii)The customer is not eligible for backup electrical resources provided through medical services, medical insurance, or community resources.
(D)Subparagraph (C) does not prevent an electrical corporation from deploying backup electrical resources or providing financial assistance for backup electrical resources under any other authority.
(7)A description of the electrical corporations appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines, including procedures for those customers receiving medical baseline allowances as described in paragraph (6). The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event. The procedures shall comply with any orders of the commission regarding notifications of deenergization events.
(8)Identification of circuits that have frequently been deenergized pursuant to a deenergization event to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken, or planned to be taken, by the electrical corporation to reduce the need for, and impact of, future deenergization of those circuits, including, but not limited to, the estimated annual decline in circuit deenergization and deenergization impact on customers, and replacing, hardening, or undergrounding any portion of the circuit or of upstream transmission or distribution lines.
(9)Plans for vegetation management.
(10)Plans for inspections of the electrical corporations electrical infrastructure.
(11)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for the deenergization of the electrical corporations transmission infrastructure, for instances when the deenergization may impact customers who, or entities that, are dependent upon the infrastructure. The protocols shall comply with any order of the commission regarding deenergization events.
(12)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, including all relevant wildfire risk and risk mitigation information that is part of the commissions then applicable Safety Model Assessment Proceeding and the Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filings. The list shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operations, and maintenance of the electrical corporations equipment and facilities.
(B)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the electrical corporations service territory.
(C)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an electrical corporation within its service territory.
(13)A description of how the plan accounts for the wildfire risk identified in the electrical corporations Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filing.
(14)A description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, taking into account the cost and time required to achieve those benefits, and to ensure that its system is prepared for a major event, including hardening and modernizing its infrastructure with improved engineering, system design, standards, equipment, and facilities, such as undergrounding, insulating of distribution wires, and replacing poles. The electrical corporation shall present the cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the commission, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding for all at least two reasonable mitigation alternatives for a given identified wildfire risk.
(15)A description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map. For each location, the The electrical corporation shall demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate mitigation explain the reasonableness of the mitigation selected, taking into account the cost effectiveness and time required for installation compared to other alternatives.
(16)A showing that the electrical corporation has an adequately sized and trained workforce to promptly restore service after a major event, taking into account employees of other utilities pursuant to mutual aid agreements and employees of entities that have entered into contracts with the electrical corporation.
(17)Identification of any geographic area in the electrical corporations service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is currently identified in a commission fire threat map, and where the commission should consider expanding the high fire threat district based on new information or changes in the environment.
(18)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk that is consistent with the methodology used by other electrical corporations unless the commission determines otherwise.
(19)A description of how the plan is consistent with the electrical corporations disaster and emergency preparedness plan prepared pursuant to Section 768.6, including both of the following:
(A)Plans to prepare for, and to restore service after, a wildfire, including workforce mobilization and prepositioning equipment and employees.
(B)Plans for community outreach and public awareness before, during, and after a wildfire, including language notification in English, Spanish, and the top three primary languages used in the state other than English or Spanish, as determined by the commission based on the United States Census data.
(20)A statement of how the electrical corporation will restore service after a wildfire.
(21)Protocols for compliance with requirements adopted by the commission regarding activities to support customers during and after a wildfire, outage reporting, support for low-income customers, billing adjustments, deposit waivers, extended payment plans, suspension of disconnection and nonpayment fees, repair processing and timing, access to electrical corporation representatives, and emergency communications.
(22)A description of the processes and procedures the electrical corporation will use to do all of the following:
(A)Monitor and audit the implementation of the plan.
(B)Identify any deficiencies in the plan or the plans implementation and correct those deficiencies.
(C)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, carried out under the plan and other applicable statutes and commission rules.
(23)Any other information that the office may require.
(d)The Wildfire Safety Division shall post all wildfire mitigation plans and annual updates on the commissions internet website before July 1, 2021, and on the offices internet website beginning July 1, 2021, for no less than two months before the divisions or offices decision regarding approval of the plan. The division or office shall accept comments on each plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and verify that the plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Electrical corporations infrastructure has, over the past 10 years, been the cause of the most destructive wildfires in California history.
(b)Electrical corporations are required to develop and submit wildfire mitigation plans each year for review and approval to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
(c)Wildfire mitigation plans and consequent investment have been a major cause of recent rate increases for California electricity consumers.
(d)Wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations propose a variety of strategies to reduce the chance of wildfire ignitions caused by equipment owned and operated by electrical corporations in California.
(e)These strategies vary widely in the amount of time they take to implement, from weeks to up to a decade, during which California residents may face ongoing exposure to risks from wildfire.
(f)These strategies vary widely in cost to implement. the cost to implement, the cost effectiveness of reducing wildfire ignition risk, and impacts to electricity service reliability.
(g)The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety and the Public Utilities Commission do not currently incorporate the greater value of mitigations that can be implemented sooner and so reduce California residents exposure to wildfire seasons sooner for California residents. ignitions from electrical infrastructure owned by electrical corporations sooner.
(h)Many of the wildfire mitigation measures to reduce utility wildfire ignition risk that take the longest to implement are also may also be the most expensive to implement for current ratepayers. electrical utility customers.
(i)Incorporating the time value of reduced exposure to wildfire risk into wildfire safety planning and the cost-approval processes for electrical corporations will may both improve safety outcomes and reduce costs for California ratepayers.
SEC. 2.Section 8386 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.(a)Each electrical corporation shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment, taking into account both the need to minimize these risks as quickly as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
(b)Each electrical corporation shall annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review and approval. In calendar year 2020, and thereafter, the plan shall cover at least a three-year period. The office shall establish a schedule for the submission of subsequent comprehensive wildfire mitigation plans, which may allow for the staggering of compliance periods for each electrical corporation. In its discretion, the office may allow the annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan; provided, that each electrical corporation shall submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every three years.
(c)The wildfire mitigation plan shall include all of the following:
(1)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.
(2)The objectives of the plan.
(3)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the electrical corporation to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of their cost effectiveness, calculated consistent with the commissions requirements, direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings), the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for preventative strategies and programs, and dynamic climate change risks.
(4)A description of the metrics the electrical corporation plans to use to evaluate the plans performance and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics, including a description of how cost effectiveness and the variation in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated into these metrics.
(5)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous plan performances has informed the plan.
(6)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety. As part of these protocols, each electrical corporation shall include protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the impacts on all of the following:
(A)Critical first responders.
(B)Health and communication infrastructure.
(C)Customers who receive medical baseline allowances pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 739. The electrical corporation may deploy backup electrical resources or provide financial assistance for backup electrical resources to a customer receiving a medical baseline allowance for a customer who meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The customer relies on life-support equipment that operates on electricity to sustain life.
(ii)The customer demonstrates financial need, including through enrollment in the California Alternate Rates for Energy program continued pursuant to Section 739.1.
(iii)The customer is not eligible for backup electrical resources provided through medical services, medical insurance, or community resources.
(D)Subparagraph (C) does not prevent an electrical corporation from deploying backup electrical resources or providing financial assistance for backup electrical resources under any other authority.
(7)A description of the electrical corporations appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines, including procedures for those customers receiving medical baseline allowances as described in paragraph (6). The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event. The procedures shall comply with any orders of the commission regarding notifications of deenergization events.
(8)Identification of circuits that have frequently been deenergized pursuant to a deenergization event to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken, or planned to be taken, by the electrical corporation to reduce the need for, and impact of, future deenergization of those circuits, including, but not limited to, the estimated annual decline in circuit deenergization and deenergization impact on customers, and replacing, hardening, or undergrounding any portion of the circuit or of upstream transmission or distribution lines.
(9)Plans for vegetation management.
(10)Plans for inspections of the electrical corporations electrical infrastructure.
(11)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for the deenergization of the electrical corporations transmission infrastructure, for instances when the deenergization may impact customers who, or entities that, are dependent upon the infrastructure. The protocols shall comply with any order of the commission regarding deenergization events.
(12)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, including all relevant wildfire risk and risk mitigation information that is part of the commissions then applicable Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings) and the Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filings. The list shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operations, and maintenance of the electrical corporations equipment and facilities.
(B)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the electrical corporations service territory.
(C)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an electrical corporation within its service territory.
(13)A description of how the plan accounts for the wildfire risk identified in the electrical corporations Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filing.
(14)A description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, taking into account the cost and time required to achieve those benefits, and to ensure that its system is prepared for a major event, including hardening and modernizing its infrastructure with improved engineering, system design, standards, equipment, and facilities, such as undergrounding, insulating of distribution wires, and replacing poles. The electrical corporation shall present the cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the commission, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding for all reasonable mitigation alternatives for a given identified wildfire risk.
(15)A description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map. For each location, the electrical corporation shall demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate mitigation taking into account the cost effectiveness and time required for installation compared to other hardening alternatives.
(16)A showing that the electrical corporation has an adequately sized and trained workforce to promptly restore service after a major event, taking into account employees of other utilities pursuant to mutual aid agreements and employees of entities that have entered into contracts with the electrical corporation.
(17)Identification of any geographic area in the electrical corporations service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is currently identified in a commission fire threat map, and where the commission should consider expanding the high fire threat district based on new information or changes in the environment.
(18)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk that is consistent with the methodology used by other electrical corporations unless the commission determines otherwise.
(19)A description of how the plan is consistent with the electrical corporations disaster and emergency preparedness plan prepared pursuant to Section 768.6, including both of the following:
(A)Plans to prepare for, and to restore service after, a wildfire, including workforce mobilization and prepositioning equipment and employees.
(B)Plans for community outreach and public awareness before, during, and after a wildfire, including language notification in English, Spanish, and the top three primary languages used in the state other than English or Spanish, as determined by the commission based on the United States Census data.
(20)A statement of how the electrical corporation will restore service after a wildfire.
(21)Protocols for compliance with requirements adopted by the commission regarding activities to support customers during and after a wildfire, outage reporting, support for low-income customers, billing adjustments, deposit waivers, extended payment plans, suspension of disconnection and nonpayment fees, repair processing and timing, access to electrical corporation representatives, and emergency communications.
(22)A description of the processes and procedures the electrical corporation will use to do all of the following:
(A)Monitor and audit the implementation of the plan.
(B)Identify any deficiencies in the plan or the plans implementation and correct those deficiencies.
(C)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, carried out under the plan and other applicable statutes and commission rules.
(23)Any other information that the office may require.
(d)The Wildfire Safety Division shall post all wildfire mitigation plans and annual updates on the commissions internet website before July 1, 2021, and on the offices internet website beginning July 1, 2021, for no less than two months before the divisions or offices decision regarding approval of the plan. The division or office shall accept comments on each plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and verify that the plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Electrical corporations infrastructure has, over the past 10 years, been the cause of the most destructive wildfires in California history.
(b)Electrical corporations are required to develop and submit wildfire mitigation plans each year for review and approval to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
(c)Wildfire mitigation plans and consequent investment have been a major cause of recent rate increases for California electricity consumers.
(d)Wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations propose a variety of strategies to reduce the chance of wildfire ignitions in California.
(e)These strategies vary widely in the amount of time they take to implement, from weeks to up to a decade, during which California residents face ongoing exposure to risks from wildfire.
(f)These strategies vary widely in cost to implement.
(f)(g)The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety and the Public Utilities Commission do not currently incorporate the greater value of mitigations that can be implemented sooner and so reduce exposure to wildfire seasons sooner for California residents.
(g)(h)Many of the wildfire mitigation measures to reduce utility ignition risk that take the longest to implement are also the most expensive to implement for current ratepayers.
(h)(i)Incorporating the time value of reduced exposure to wildfire risk into wildfire safety planning and the cost-approval processes for electrical corporations will both improve safety outcomes and reduce costs for California ratepayers.
SEC. 2.Section 8386 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.(a)Each electrical corporation shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment, taking into account the need to minimize these risks as quickly as possible. possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
(b)Each electrical corporation shall annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the office for review and approval. In calendar year 2020, and thereafter, the plan shall cover at least a three-year period. The office shall establish a schedule for the submission of subsequent comprehensive wildfire mitigation plans, which may allow for the staggering of compliance periods for each electrical corporation. In its discretion, the office may allow the annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan; provided, that each electrical corporation shall submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every three years.
(c)The wildfire mitigation plan shall include all of the following:
(1)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.
(2)The objectives of the plan.
(3)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the electrical corporation to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of their cost effectiveness, calculated consistent with the commissions requirements, the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for preventative strategies and programs programs, and dynamic climate change risks.
(4)A description of the metrics the electrical corporation plans to use to evaluate the plans performance and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics, including a description of how cost effectiveness and the variation in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated into these metrics.
(5)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous plan performances has informed the plan.
(6)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety. As part of these protocols, each electrical corporation shall include protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the impacts on all of the following:
(A)Critical first responders.
(B)Health and communication infrastructure.
(C)Customers who receive medical baseline allowances pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 739. The electrical corporation may deploy backup electrical resources or provide financial assistance for backup electrical resources to a customer receiving a medical baseline allowance for a customer who meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The customer relies on life-support equipment that operates on electricity to sustain life.
(ii)The customer demonstrates financial need, including through enrollment in the California Alternate Rates for Energy program continued pursuant to Section 739.1.
(iii)The customer is not eligible for backup electrical resources provided through medical services, medical insurance, or community resources.
(D)Subparagraph (C) shall not be construed as preventing does not prevent an electrical corporation from deploying backup electrical resources or providing financial assistance for backup electrical resources under any other authority.
(7)A description of the electrical corporations appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines, including procedures for those customers receiving medical baseline allowances as described in paragraph (6). The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event. The procedures shall comply with any orders of the commission regarding notifications of deenergization events.
(8)Identification of circuits that have frequently been deenergized pursuant to a deenergization event to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken, or planned to be taken, by the electrical corporation to reduce the need for, and impact of, future deenergization of those circuits, including, but not limited to, the estimated annual decline in circuit deenergization and deenergization impact on customers, and replacing, hardening, or undergrounding any portion of the circuit or of upstream transmission or distribution lines.
(9)Plans for vegetation management.
(10)Plans for inspections of the electrical corporations electrical infrastructure.
(11)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for the deenergization of the electrical corporations transmission infrastructure, for instances when the deenergization may impact customers who, or entities that, are dependent upon the infrastructure. The protocols shall comply with any order of the commission regarding deenergization events.
(12)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, including all relevant wildfire risk and risk mitigation information that is part of the commissions then applicable Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al.) al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings) and the Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filings. The list shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(A)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operations, and maintenance of the electrical corporations equipment and facilities.
(B)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the electrical corporations service territory.
(C)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an electrical corporation within its service territory.
(13)A description of how the plan accounts for the wildfire risk identified in the electrical corporations Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filing.
(14)A description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, taking into account the cost and time required to achieve those benefits, and to ensure that its system is prepared for a major event, including hardening and modernizing its infrastructure with improved engineering, system design, standards, equipment, and facilities, such as undergrounding, insulating of distribution wires, and replacing poles. The electrical corporation shall present the cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the commission, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding for all reasonable mitigation alternatives for a given identified wildfire risk.
(15)A description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map. For each location, the electrical corporation shall demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate mitigation taking into account the cost effectiveness and time required for installation compared to other hardening alternatives.
(16)A showing that the electrical corporation has an adequately sized and trained workforce to promptly restore service after a major event, taking into account employees of other utilities pursuant to mutual aid agreements and employees of entities that have entered into contracts with the electrical corporation.
(17)Identification of any geographic area in the electrical corporations service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is currently identified in a commission fire threat map, and where the commission should consider expanding the high fire threat district based on new information or changes in the environment.
(18)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk that is consistent with the methodology used by other electrical corporations unless the commission determines otherwise.
(19)A description of how the plan is consistent with the electrical corporations disaster and emergency preparedness plan prepared pursuant to Section 768.6, including both of the following:
(A)Plans to prepare for, and to restore service after, a wildfire, including workforce mobilization and prepositioning equipment and employees.
(B)Plans for community outreach and public awareness before, during, and after a wildfire, including language notification in English, Spanish, and the top three primary languages used in the state other than English or Spanish, as determined by the commission based on the United States Census data.
(20)A statement of how the electrical corporation will restore service after a wildfire.
(21)Protocols for compliance with requirements adopted by the commission regarding activities to support customers during and after a wildfire, outage reporting, support for low-income customers, billing adjustments, deposit waivers, extended payment plans, suspension of disconnection and nonpayment fees, repair processing and timing, access to electrical corporation representatives, and emergency communications.
(22)A description of the processes and procedures the electrical corporation will use to do all of the following:
(A)Monitor and audit the implementation of the plan.
(B)Identify any deficiencies in the plan or the plans implementation and correct those deficiencies.
(C)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, carried out under the plan and other applicable statutes and commission rules.
(23)Any other information that the office may require.
(d)The Wildfire Safety Division shall post all wildfire mitigation plans and annual updates on the commissions internet website before July 1, 2021, and on the offices internet website beginning July 1, 2021, for no less than two months before the divisions or offices decision regarding approval of the plan. The division or office shall accept comments on each plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and verify that the plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)Electrical corporations infrastructure has, over the past 10 years, been the cause of the most destructive wildfires in California history.
(b)Electrical corporations are required to develop and submit wildfire mitigation plans each year for review and approval to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety.
(c)Wildfire mitigation plans and consequent investment have been a major cause of recent rate increases for California electricity consumers.
(d)Wildfire mitigation plans of electrical corporations propose a variety of strategies to reduce the chance of wildfire ignitions in California.
(e)These strategies vary widely in the amount of time they take to implement, from weeks to up to a decade, during which California residents face ongoing exposure to risks from wildfire.
(f)The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety and the Public Utilities Commission do not currently incorporate the greater value of mitigations that can be implemented sooner and so reduce exposure to wildfire seasons sooner for California residents.
(g)Many of the wildfire mitigation measures to reduce utility ignition risk that take the longest to implement are also the most expensive to implement for current ratepayers.
(h)Incorporating the time value of reduced exposure to wildfire risk into wildfire safety planning and the cost-approval processes for electrical corporations will both improve safety outcomes and reduce costs for California ratepayers.
SEC. 2.Section 8386 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to read:8386.(a)Each electrical corporation shall construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment. equipment, taking into account the need to minimize these risks as quickly as possible.
(b)Each electrical corporation shall annually prepare and submit a wildfire mitigation plan to the Wildfire Safety Division office for review and approval. In calendar year 2020, and thereafter, the plan shall cover at least a three-year period. The division office shall establish a schedule for the submission of subsequent comprehensive wildfire mitigation plans, which may allow for the staggering of compliance periods for each electrical corporation. In its discretion, the division office may allow the annual submissions to be updates to the last approved comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan; provided, that each electrical corporation shall submit a comprehensive wildfire mitigation plan at least once every three years.
(c)The wildfire mitigation plan shall include all of the following:
(1)An accounting of the responsibilities of persons responsible for executing the plan.
(2)The objectives of the plan.
(3)A description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the electrical corporation to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for preventative strategies and programs and dynamic climate change risks.
(4)A description of the metrics the electrical corporation plans to use to evaluate the plans performance and the assumptions that underlie the use of those metrics. metrics, including a description of how variation in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated into these metrics.
(5)A discussion of how the application of previously identified metrics to previous plan performances has informed the plan.
(6)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the associated impacts on public safety. As part of these protocols, each electrical corporation shall include protocols related to mitigating the public safety impacts of disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electrical distribution system that consider the impacts on all of the following:
(A)Critical first responders.
(B)Health and communication infrastructure.
(C)Customers who receive medical baseline allowances pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 739. The electrical corporation may deploy backup electrical resources or provide financial assistance for backup electrical resources to a customer receiving a medical baseline allowance for a customer who meets all of the following requirements:
(i)The customer relies on life-support equipment that operates on electricity to sustain life.
(ii)The customer demonstrates financial need, including through enrollment in the California Alternate Rates for Energy program continued pursuant to Section 739.1.
(iii)The customer is not eligible for backup electrical resources provided through medical services, medical insurance, or community resources.
(D)Subparagraph (C) shall not be construed as preventing an electrical corporation from deploying backup electrical resources or providing financial assistance for backup electrical resources under any other authority.
(7)A description of the electrical corporations appropriate and feasible procedures for notifying a customer who may be impacted by the deenergizing of electrical lines, including procedures for those customers receiving medical baseline allowances as described in paragraph (6). The procedures shall direct notification to all public safety offices, critical first responders, health care facilities, and operators of telecommunications infrastructure with premises within the footprint of potential deenergization for a given event. The procedures shall comply with any orders of the commission regarding notifications of deenergization events.
(8)Identification of circuits that have frequently been deenergized pursuant to a deenergization event to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken, or planned to be taken, by the electrical corporation to reduce the need for, and impact of, future deenergization of those circuits, including, but not limited to, the estimated annual decline in circuit deenergization and deenergization impact on customers, and replacing, hardening, or undergrounding any portion of the circuit or of upstream transmission or distribution lines.
(9)Plans for vegetation management.
(10)Plans for inspections of the electrical corporations electrical infrastructure.
(11)A description of the electrical corporations protocols for the deenergization of the electrical corporations transmission infrastructure, for instances when the deenergization may impact customers who, or entities that, are dependent upon the infrastructure. The protocols shall comply with any order of the commission regarding deenergization events.
(12)A list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporations service territory, including all relevant wildfire risk and risk mitigation information that is part of the commissions Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al.) and the Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filings. The list shall include, but not be limited to, both all of the following:
(A)Risks and risk drivers associated with design, construction, operations, and maintenance of the electrical corporations equipment and facilities.
(B)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with topographic and climatological risk factors throughout the different parts of the electrical corporations service territory.
(C)Particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an electrical corporation within its service territory.
(13)A description of how the plan accounts for the wildfire risk identified in the electrical corporations Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase filing.
(14)A description of the actions the electrical corporation will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability, and resiliency, and to ensure that its system is prepared for a major event, including hardening and modernizing its infrastructure with improved engineering, system design, standards, equipment, and facilities, such as undergrounding, insulating of distribution wires, and replacing poles.
(15)A description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map.
(16)A showing that the electrical corporation has an adequately sized and trained workforce to promptly restore service after a major event, taking into account employees of other utilities pursuant to mutual aid agreements and employees of entities that have entered into contracts with the electrical corporation.
(17)Identification of any geographic area in the electrical corporations service territory that is a higher wildfire threat than is currently identified in a commission fire threat map, and where the commission should consider expanding the high fire threat district based on new information or changes in the environment.
(18)A methodology for identifying and presenting enterprisewide safety risk and wildfire-related risk that is consistent with the methodology used by other electrical corporations unless the commission determines otherwise.
(19)A description of how the plan is consistent with the electrical corporations disaster and emergency preparedness plan prepared pursuant to Section 768.6, including both of the following:
(A)Plans to prepare for, and to restore service after, a wildfire, including workforce mobilization and prepositioning equipment and employees.
(B)Plans for community outreach and public awareness before, during, and after a wildfire, including language notification in English, Spanish, and the top three primary languages used in the state other than English or Spanish, as determined by the commission based on the United States Census data.
(20)A statement of how the electrical corporation will restore service after a wildfire.
(21)Protocols for compliance with requirements adopted by the commission regarding activities to support customers during and after a wildfire, outage reporting, support for low-income customers, billing adjustments, deposit waivers, extended payment plans, suspension of disconnection and nonpayment fees, repair processing and timing, access to electrical corporation representatives, and emergency communications.
(22)A description of the processes and procedures the electrical corporation will use to do all of the following:
(A)Monitor and audit the implementation of the plan.
(B)Identify any deficiencies in the plan or the plans implementation and correct those deficiencies.
(C)Monitor and audit the effectiveness of electrical line and equipment inspections, including inspections performed by contractors, carried out under the plan and other applicable statutes and commission rules.
(23)Any other information that the Wildfire Safety Division office may require.
(d)The Wildfire Safety Division shall post all wildfire mitigation plans and annual updates on the commissions internet website before July 1, 2021, and on the offices internet website beginning July 1, 2021, for no less than two months before the divisions or offices decision regarding approval of the plan. The division or office shall accept comments on each plan from the public, other local and state agencies, and interested parties, and verify that the plan complies with all applicable rules, regulations, and standards, as appropriate.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2024 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Aug 31, 2024 | Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 54. Noes 17. Page 7099.) |
| Aug 30, 2024 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (August 30). |
| Aug 29, 2024 | Withdrawn from committee. |
| Aug 29, 2024 | Re-referred to Com. on U. & E. pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2. |
| Aug 29, 2024 | Ordered to third reading. |
| Aug 29, 2024 | Joint Rule 62(a) suspended. |
| Aug 29, 2024 | Assembly Rule 96 suspended. |
| Aug 28, 2024 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. |
| Aug 27, 2024 | Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Assembly Rule 97. |
| Aug 20, 2024 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Aug 19, 2024 | Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading. |
| Aug 15, 2024 | From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (August 15). |
| Aug 7, 2024 | August 7 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file. |
| Jul 2, 2024 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (July 1). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Jun 20, 2024 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on U. & E. |
| Jun 17, 2024 | June 19 hearing postponed by committee. |
| Jun 3, 2024 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on U. & E. |
| May 28, 2024 | Referred to Com. on U. & E. |
| May 21, 2024 | In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk. |
| May 20, 2024 | Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 4024.) Ordered to the Assembly. |
| May 16, 2024 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| May 16, 2024 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3967.) (May 16). |
| May 10, 2024 | Set for hearing May 16. |
| Apr 15, 2024 | April 15 hearing: Placed on APPR suspense file. |
| Apr 5, 2024 | Set for hearing April 15. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | April 8 hearing postponed by committee. |
| Mar 28, 2024 | Set for hearing April 8. |
| Mar 21, 2024 | Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Mar 20, 2024 | From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 17. Noes 0. Page 3349.) (March 19). |
| Mar 7, 2024 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on E., U. & C. |
| Mar 6, 2024 | Set for hearing March 19. |
| Feb 14, 2024 | Referred to Com. on E., U. & C. |
| Feb 2, 2024 | From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 3. |
| Feb 1, 2024 | Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 30, 2024 | Do pass. | Assembly Standing Committee on Utilities and Energy |
Passed |
|
| Aug 15, 2024 | Do pass as amended. | Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Jul 1, 2024 | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar | Assembly Standing Committee on Utilities and Energy |
Passed |
|
| May 20, 2024 | Senate 3rd Reading SB1003 Dodd | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| May 16, 2024 | Do pass | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Apr 15, 2024 | Placed on suspense file | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Mar 19, 2024 | Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Senate Standing Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| California Farm Bureau Federation | ** Support | |
| Clean Power Campaign | ** Support | |
| Defenders Of Wildlife | ** Support | |
| Junior Philanthropist Foundation | ** Support | |
| Pacific Forest Trust | ** Support | |
| Pacific Gas And Electric Company | * Indeterminate | Mar 19, 2024 |
| Planning And Conservation League | ** Support | |
| Sierra Forest Legacy | ** Support | |
| Sonoma Clean Power | ** Support | |
| Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment | * Support | Mar 19, 2024 |
| The Utility Reform Network | ** Support | |
| U.S. Green Building Council - Los Angeles | ** Support | |
| USGBC Los Angeles | ** Support |
SENATE THIRD READING
STR Bill Id:SB 1003
Author:(Dodd)
As Amended Ver:August 28, 2024
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Modifies timelines relevant to the submission and approval of wildfire mitigation plans (WMPs) by electrical corporations – also known as investor-owned electric utilities (IOUs) – to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety (OEIS) and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Requires IOUs to take into account, in their WMP, both the time required to implement an action and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
Major Provisions
- Requires IOUs to submit a WMP to OEIS for review at least once every four years.
- Requires IOUs, beginning January 1, 2026, to submit a preliminary WMP to OEIS within one year before the filing of its general rate case (GRC) application or concurrent with the filing of its Risk Assessment Mitigation Phase (RAMP) application with the CPUC.
- Requires the CPUC to consult with OEIS on IOU wildfire activities in rendering its GRC decisions.
- Requires IOUs to, within 45 days of the CPUC's GRC decision, submit a revised WMP that conforms to the CPUC's revenue authorization. Requires OEIS to review and either approve or request modifications to the revised WMP; OEIS must approve WMPs within two months of the revised submission. Requires the IOUs to file the revised WMP, once approved by OEIS, as an information-only submittal with the CPUC.
- Revises the requirements of the WMP to, among other things:
- Require the list of all wildfire risks and drivers for those risks in an IOU's service territory to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an IOU within its service territory.
- Require the description of actions the IOU takes to ensure safety, reliability, and resiliency of its system to also include consideration of the cost and time required to achieve those benefits.
- Require the presentation of certain cost-efficient measures adopted by the CPUC.
- Removes the mandate on the CPUC to authorize an IOU to establish a memorandum account to track costs of the WMP, and makes such authorization at the commission's discretion.
- Requires local publicly-owned electric utilities (POUs) and electrical cooperatives (co-ops), after January 1, 2026, to submit a WMP to the Wildfire Safety Oversight Advisory Board at least once every four years.
- Makes several nonsubstantive amendments to statute for code clean-up purposes.
COMMENTS
Electric utility-related wildfires – California has experienced some of the most devastating and costly wildfires over the past decade. Spurred by climate change, the risks for wildfires have increased with larger populations of dead trees – which serve as fuel – from extended drought conditions and bark beetle infestations, more frequent extreme heat and high wind events, and growing encroachment of development into forested and high-fire threat areas. Electrical equipment, including downed power lines, arcing, and conductor contact with trees and grass, can act as ignition sources. Utility-caused fires are often more destructive than those resulting from other sources because many occur in remote areas during high wind events, and those same weather conditions cause the fire to spread quickly, making it difficult to control. In response, the Legislature has passed many statutes to require electric utilities to mitigate the risk of their equipment and operations from igniting wildfires; these actions are detailed, submitted to, and approved by OEIS or the Wildfire Safety Oversight Advisory Board in a WMP.
Rising utility bills from wildfire mitigation efforts – Since 2013, rates have increased across all three IOUs and exceeded the assumed rate of inflation. Californians currently pay some of the highest utility rates in the country. According to the CPUC, one of the key drivers putting upward pressure on customers' electric rates since 2021 is wildfire mitigation work. Over the next several years, wildfire risk mitigation costs are projected to continue their upward trend, from both the recovery of past incurred costs and of future projected costs. While these costs encompass a wide variety of wildfire risk costs, including vegetation management efforts and wildfire liability insurance coverage, the high costs of undergrounding, which contributed to hiking the average utility bill by more than $30 a month for PG&E customers earlier this year, are being acutely felt by ratepayers.
A regulatory paradigm for risk evaluation – Through legislative efforts, the assessment of WMPs is bisected between OEIS, who evaluates the safety of proposed projects, and the CPUC, who evaluates the costs to implement safety projects. They work in tandem: The WMP requires approval by OEIS before it is evaluated by the CPUC. Since these two entities have different and distinct priorities, often in practice the CPUC authorizes a modified version of the OEIS-approved WMP. For example, in PG&E's most recent WMP, OEIS approved the utility's plan to underground 2,100 miles from 2023 to 2026 which would result in reducing ignition risk and de-energization events by approximately 99% in the most threatened areas. Subsequently, PG&E requested rate recovery in their 2023-26 GRC for 2,000 miles of undergrounding – close to the estimation in their approved WMP – at an estimated cost of $5.9 billion. The CPUC then only authorized 1,230 miles of undergrounding, opting to authorize covered conduction installation for the other 778 miles, at a forecasted expenditure of $4.7 billion together. This tension between safety and cost, and the different outcomes inherent in balancing the two, is highlighted by these recent decisions regarding PG&E's undergrounding plan.
This bill seeks to close the gap between OEIS's and the CPUC's review of an IOU's WMP by conforming the timeline of WMP review to the 4-year timeline of revenue authorization, requiring the CPUC to consult with OEIS on the proposed WMP during GRC application reviews, and requiring another review of the WMP by OEIS, after the IOU's costs have been authorized by the CPUC. This bill also requires the IOUs to use timeliness and cost efficiency as elements in their justification for selecting certain mitigation measures in their WMPs, which may provide some additional clarity into how they select certain mitigation strategies over others, and as such may allow both OEIS and the CPUC to more appropriately weight the IOUs' proposals. This bill, however, does not require OEIS to act on the additional information on cost provided by the IOUs or change the fundamental mission of the office. Given the measure's goal to align the timelines for the CPUC's review of an IOU's WMP with their review of its GRC application, this bill also removes the requirement for the CPUC to authorize memorandum accounts to track costs of the WMP, making such authorization at the CPUC's discretion.
To align protocol between IOUs and POUs or co-ops, this bill also adjusts the timeline for the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board's review of a POU's or co-op's WMP to at least once every four years.
According to the Author
"While some IOUs contend that undergrounding cable is the safest way to reduce the risk of igniting new wildfires, there are alternatives, such as insulating existing utility cable. Insulating wires, for example, costs an estimated $800,000 per mile, compared to $3 million per mile for undergrounding and may be as, or nearly as effective in preventing wildfire ignitions as undergrounding, and achievable in far less time. While the current IOU wildfire mitigation plan review process does assess the amount of wildfire risk reduction from different strategies, relative to cost, it does not consider the speed with which different strategies can be delivered. Safety today has a different value (time value) than safety in 3 or 10 years. Failure to take this factor into account may result in today's utility customers paying higher electric utility rates without commensurate benefit from wildfire risk reduction."
Arguments in Support
This bill has been significantly amended, and the committee has not heard from support on the most recent version. Still, the Clean Power Campaign writes in support of a previous version of this bill, "While undergrounding is an effective wildfire mitigation strategy, it is not the sole solution. Undergrounding requires long lead time and the costs associated with these projects increase electricity bills, putting a substantial burden on ratepayers. It is crucial to consider alternative strategies…which may be as effective in preventing wildfire ignitions as undergrounding but achievable at a fraction of the cost and in far less time. [This bill] would ensure that the maximum amount of risk from utility-sparked wildfires is reduced in the shortest amount of time at the most favorable cost."
Arguments in Opposition
None on file, but this bill has been significantly amended, and the committee has not heard from interested parties on the most recent version.
FISCAL COMMENTS
Unknown. This bill has been significantly amended, and the current version has not received review by a fiscal committee. A review by the Assembly Committee on Appropriations on a previous version of this bill, which is still largely captured in the current measure, estimated resulting costs at OEIS to total $729,272 (Public Utilities Commission Utilities Reimbursement Account (PUCURA)) annually and costs at the CPUC to total $210,000 (PUCURA) annually.
VOTES
SENATE FLOOR: 39-0-1
YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Caballero, Cortese, Dahle, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Newman, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Seyarto, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener, Wilk
ABS, ABST OR NV: Min
ASM UTILITIES AND ENERGY: 15-0-1
YES: Petrie-Norris, Bauer-Kahan, Calderon, Chen, Friedman, Hart, Holden, Joe Patterson, Reyes, Santiago, Schiavo, Ting, Wallis, Wood, Zbur
ABS, ABST OR NV: Jim Patterson
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-0-4
YES: Wicks, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Pellerin, Villapudua
ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez, Dixon, Jim Patterson, Ta
ASM UTILITIES AND ENERGY: 16-0-0
YES: Petrie-Norris, Jim Patterson, Bauer-Kahan, Calderon, Chen, Friedman, Hart, Holden, Joe Patterson, Reyes, Santiago, Schiavo, Ting, Wallis, Wood, Zbur
UPDATED
VERSION: August 28, 2024
CONSULTANT: Kathleen Chen / U. & E. / (916) 319-2083 FN: 0004887
SENATE THIRD READING
STR Bill Id:SB 1003
Author:(Dodd)
As Amended Ver:August 19, 2024
Majority vote
SUMMARY
Requires electrical corporations to take into account both the time required to implement an action and the amount of risk reduced for the cost of a given action as part of the utility's wildfire mitigation plan (WMP).
Major Provisions
- Makes several findings and declarations related to: wildfire risks posed by infrastructure owned by electrical corporations; wildfire mitigation as a cost driver on electric utility bills; and the need to balance the time value and cost efficiency of wildfire mitigation measures into wildfire safety planning and cost-approval processes.
- Requires an electrical corporation, also known as an investor-owned utility (IOU), to minimize the risks its electrical lines and equipment pose in contributing to catastrophic wildfires, taking into account both the time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
- Revises the requirements of the WMP to, among other things:
- Require the description of the preventative wildfire mitigation strategies and programs to be adopted by the IOU to also include consideration of their cost efficiency – calculated consistent with the direction provided by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in its Safety Model Assessment Proceedings – and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the mitigation measures.
- Require the list of all wildfire risks and drivers for those risks in an IOU's service territory to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an IOU.
- Require the description of actions the IOU takes to ensure safety, reliability, and resiliency of its system to also include consideration of the cost and time required to achieve those benefits.
- Require the presentation of certain cost-efficient measures adopted by the CPUC.
- Require, in its description of where and how the utility considered undergrounding, the IOU to explain the reasonableness, including consideration of cost efficiency, reliability impacts, and time required for installation compared to other alternatives, of the selected mitigation measure.
COMMENTS
Electric utility-related wildfires – California has experienced some of the most devastating and costly wildfires over the past decade. Spurred by climate change, the risks for wildfires have increased with larger populations of dead trees – which serve as fuel – from extended drought conditions and bark beetle infestations, more frequent extreme heat and high wind events, and growing encroachment of development into forested and high-fire threat areas. Electrical equipment, including downed power lines, arcing, and conductor contact with trees and grass, can act as ignition sources. Of the 20 most destructive wildfires since 2015, power lines have caused six. Utility-caused fires are often more destructive than those resulting from other sources because many occur in remote areas during high wind events, and those same weather conditions cause the fire to spread quickly, making it difficult to control. In response, the Legislature has passed many statutes to require electric utilities to mitigate the risk of their equipment and operations from igniting wildfires. Additionally, electric utilities shoulder the property liability costs from wildfires ignited by their equipment through the application of inverse condemnation.
Rising utility bills from wildfire mitigation efforts – Since 2013, rates have increased across all three IOUs and exceeded the assumed rate of inflation. Californians currently pay some of the highest utility rates in the country. According to the CPUC, one of the key drivers putting upward pressure on customers' electric rates since 2021 is wildfire mitigation work. Over the next several years, wildfire risk mitigation costs are projected to continue their upward trend, from both the recovery of past incurred costs and of future projected costs. While these costs encompass a wide variety of wildfire risk costs, including vegetation management efforts and wildfire liability insurance coverage, the high costs of undergrounding, which contributed to hiking the average utility bill by more than $30 a month for PG&E customers earlier this year, are being acutely felt by ratepayers.
A regulatory paradigm for risk evaluation – Through legislative efforts, the assessment of WMPs is bisected between the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety (OEIS), who evaluates the safety of proposed projects, and the CPUC, who evaluates the costs to implement safety projects. They work in tandem: the WMP requires approval by OEIS before it is evaluated by the CPUC. Since these two entities have different and distinct priorities, often in practice the CPUC authorizes a modified version of the OEIS-approved WMP. For example, in PG&E's most recent WMP, OEIS approved the utility's plan to underground 2,100 miles from 2023 to 2026 which would result in reducing ignition risk and de-energization events by approximately 99% in the most threatened areas.[1] Subsequently, PG&E requested rate recovery in their 2023-26 general rate case (GRC) for 2,000 miles of undergrounding – close to the estimation in their approved WMP – at an estimated cost of $5.9 billion. The CPUC then only authorized 1,230 miles of undergrounding, opting to authorize covered conduction installation for the other 778 miles, at a forecasted expenditure of $4.7 billion together. This tension between safety and cost, and the different outcomes inherent in balancing the two, is highlighted by these recent decisions regarding PG&E's undergrounding plan.
This bill would require the IOUs to evaluate and explain the timeliness and cost-efficiency of mitigation measures in their WMPs. Supporters of this bill motivate the need for this extra information on mitigation efforts by citing utility undergrounding projects as a source of concern. They contend that waiting several years for undergrounding projects does not reduce the risk of wildfire ignitions quickly enough and comes with too high a price tag as compared to other measures that can be deployed sooner. However, this seemingly presumes that timeliness and cost efficiency go hand-in-hand. This may not be the case. According to a study by the University of California, Berkeley's Energy Institute at Haas, vegetation management is timelier but less cost-efficient than undergrounding. Additionally, the utilities are becoming more efficient with undergrounding: Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) reported undergrounding 350 miles in 2023, almost double the 180 miles they undergrounded in 2022, and nearly five times more than the 73 miles they undergrounded in 2021 (73 miles); and they reported reducing undergrounding costs from $4 million per mile in 2021 to $3.3 million per mile by the end of 2023. PG&E anticipates achieving more efficiencies with both the pace and cost of undergrounding in the coming years.
The proposal in this bill also calls into question how the omission of other factors, such as reliability and social impact, may impact OEIS' decision-making. The balancing of safety, timeliness, and cost might favor the use of operational mitigation measures such as fast-trip settings and public safety power shutoffs, which are the cheapest and quickest to deploy, but would lead to unplanned power outages, impacting reliability and posing immense consequences for public health and commerce.
It is unclear to the committee how the function of OEIS would remain distinct from the CPUC should the office be required to consider cost efficiency in its evaluation of WMP actions. Such a direction would be counter to the intent of previous legislative efforts, which sought to establish in OEIS a regulator whose sole focus and mission is safety. However, this bill does not obligate OEIS to select wildfire mitigation actions solely on the basis of cost, nor even to act on the additional information required by this bill as part of the WMP. Rather, it requires the IOUs to use timeliness and cost efficiency as elements in their justification for selecting certain mitigation measures in their WMPs. The IOUs already report cost values as part of their WMP filing – either risk-spend efficiency or cost-benefit ratio metrics. OEIS reviews the proposed mitigations on the basis of what will minimize system risk. This bill does not change this fundamental structure of OEIS, but instead may provide some additional clarity into how the IOUs select certain mitigation strategies over others, and allow both OEIS and the CPUC to appropriately weight the IOUs' proposals.
According to the Author
"While some IOUs contend that undergrounding cable is the safest way to reduce the risk of igniting new wildfires, there are alternatives, such as insulating existing utility cable. Insulating wires, for example, costs an estimated $800,000 per mile, compared to $3 million per mile for undergrounding and may be as, or nearly as effective in preventing wildfire ignitions as undergrounding, and achievable in far less time. While the current IOU wildfire mitigation plan review process does assess the amount of wildfire risk reduction from different strategies, relative to cost, it does not consider the speed with which different strategies can be delivered. Safety today has a different value (time value) than safety in 3 or 10 years. Failure to take this factor into account may result in today's utility customers paying higher electric utility rates without commensurate benefit from wildfire risk reduction."
Arguments in Support
The Clean Power Campaign writes in support of a previous but similar version of this bill, "While undergrounding is an effective wildfire mitigation strategy, it is not the sole solution. Undergrounding requires long lead time and the costs associated with these projects increase electricity bills, putting a substantial burden on ratepayers. It is crucial to consider alternative strategies…which may be as effective in preventing wildfire ignitions as undergrounding but achievable at a fraction of the cost and in far less time. [This bill] would ensure that the maximum amount of risk from utility-sparked wildfires is reduced in the shortest amount of time at the most favorable cost."
Arguments in Opposition
None on file.
FISCAL COMMENTS
According to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations, this bill will incur costs at OEIS to cover two regulatory analyst positions and one utilities engineer position beginning in fiscal year 2024-25, totaling $729,272 (Public Utilities Commission Utilities Reimbursement Account (PUCURA)) annually. While this bill makes no direct requirement of the CPUC, the CPUC will likely incur costs associated with oversight of IOUs and review of new types of data and analysis the IOUs submit to OEIS as a result of this bill. The CPUC expects to dedicate one regulatory analyst to this effort, with an associated annual cost of $210,000 (PUCURA).
VOTES
SENATE FLOOR: 39-0-1
YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Caballero, Cortese, Dahle, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Newman, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Seyarto, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener, Wilk
ABS, ABST OR NV: Min
ASM UTILITIES AND ENERGY: 15-0-1
YES: Petrie-Norris, Bauer-Kahan, Calderon, Chen, Friedman, Hart, Holden, Joe Patterson, Reyes, Santiago, Schiavo, Ting, Wallis, Wood, Zbur
ABS, ABST OR NV: Jim Patterson
ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-0-4
YES: Wicks, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Pellerin, Villapudua
ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez, Dixon, Jim Patterson, Ta
UPDATED
VERSION: August 19, 2024
CONSULTANT: Kathleen Chen / U. & E. / (916) 319-2083 FN: 0004115
PG&E; 2023-2025 Wildfire Mitigation Plan; Page 345 and Table 8.1.2-2; March 2023. ↑
Date of Hearing: August 7, 2024
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Buffy Wicks, Chair
SBPCA Bill Id:SB 1003
Author:(Dodd) – As Amended Ver:June 20, 2024
Policy Committee: | Utilities and Energy | Vote: | 15 - 0 |
|
| ||
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill requires an electrical corporation to expand its statutorily required wildfire mitigation plan (WMP) to include consideration of the time it takes to implement a proposed mitigation measure and the amount of risk reduced for the cost of the measure.
Specifically, this bill:
- Expands existing law that requires an electrical corporation, also known as an investor-owned electrical utility (IOU), to construct, maintain and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a way that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire so that the IOU, in doing so, must consider both the time required to implement proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost.
- Expands existing statute that requires each IOU to annually prepare and submit a WMP to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety (OEIS) with the Natural Resources Agency, so that:
- The IOU’s WMP description of the preventive strategies and programs to be adopted by the IOU to minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires newly include consideration of the preventative strategies’ (i) cost effectiveness, calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (S-MAP) (A.15-05-002, et al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings) and (ii) the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for preventative strategies and programs.
- The IOU’s WMP list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, newly include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the IOU within the IOU’s service territory.
- IOU’s WMP description of the actions the IOU will take to ensure its system will achieve the highest level of safety, reliability and resiliency newly (i) takes into account the cost and time required to achieve those benefits and (ii) presents the cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), calculated consistent with the direction provided by the most recent S-MAP for at least two reasonable mitigation alternatives for a given identified wildfire risk.
- The IOU’s WMP description of where and how the IOU considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a commission fire threat map also newly explains the reasonableness of the mitigation selected, taking into account the cost-effectiveness, reliability impacts and time required for installation compared to other alternatives.
FISCAL EFFECT:
- OEIS will need to receive and analyze new types of data submitted as part of the IOU WMPs. OEIS estimates it will need $729,272 annually, beginning in fiscal year 2024-25, as follows: two regulatory analysts at an annual cost of $241,787 each and one utilities engineer at an annual cost of $245,698 (Public Utilities Commission Utilities Reimbursement Account (PUCURA)).
- While this bill makes no direct requirement of the CPUC, the CPUC will likely incur costs associated with oversight of IOUs and review of new types of data and analysis the IOUs submit to OEIS as a result of this bill. The CPUC assumes it will need to review any new cost efficiency data submitted by any of the nine IOUs it regulates as part of that IOU’s WMP from these nine utilities required under existing statute to annually prepare and submit a WMP, and to coordinate with OEIS to ensure that the CPUC’s ratification of the OEIS approval of the WMPs is based upon an accurate assessment of cost-efficiency and the possible variations in implementation timelines. The CPUC expects to dedicate one regulatory analyst to this effort, with an associated annual cost of $210,000 (PUCURA).
COMMENTS:
- Purpose. Noting proposals by IOUs to underground electrical cables, the author intends this bill to result in the IOUs, when developing their WMPs, considering the time it takes to implement proposed safety measures. As the author puts it, “Safety today has a different value (time value) than safety in 3 or 10 years. Failure to take this factor into account may result in today’s utility customers paying higher electric utility rates without commensurate benefit from wildfire risk reduction.”
- Background. Following a series of devastating wildfires, many of them ignited by utility equipment, the Legislature passed a new law requiring the IOUs to operate their systems more safely. More specifically, statute requires each electric IOU annually to file with OEIS a WMP that shows how the IOU, over the next three year period, will minimize the risk of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires, including consideration of dynamic climate change risks. The WMP must also include the individuals responsible for related duties and metrics the IOU will use to evaluate performance of its plan. OEIS is to review and, potentially, approve each plan considering the plan from the perspective of safety. Separately, the CPUC reviews each OEIS-approved WMP from the perspective of cost-effectiveness. In other words, the CPUC considers whether a WMP is just and reasonable from the perspective of the IOU ratepayer.
Recently, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) proposed, as part of its WMP, placing underground thousands of miles of electric cables. OEIS largely approved PG&E’s plan, consistent with its focus on safety, because “undergrounding” of electrical wires largely eliminates the risk of those wires igniting a fire. However, subsequently, the CPUC significantly modified PG&E’s plan, ordering the IOU to instead insulate many sections of wire because doing so is much less costly than placing wire underground, and, in some cases, nearly as effective.
This bill requires each IOU to consider the time it takes to implement a proposed mitigation measure and the amount of risk reduced for the cost. Presumably, such consideration would favor actions like insulation of wires over undergrounding, though the outcomes will vary by proposal. The bill does not affect the CPUC’s authority to determine the just and reasonableness of an IOU’s WMP of to modify it.
Analysis Prepared by: Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
Date of Hearing: July 1, 2024
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES AND ENERGY
Cottie Petrie-Norris, Chair
SBPCA Bill Id:SB 1003
Author:(Dodd) – As Amended Ver:June 20, 2024
SENATE VOTE: 39-0
SUBJECT: Electrical corporations: wildfire mitigation plans
SUMMARY: Requires electrical corporations to take into account both the time required to implement an action and the amount of risk reduced for the cost of a given action as part of the utility’s wildfire mitigation plan (WMP).
Specifically, this bill:
- Makes several findings and declarations related to: wildfire risks posed by infrastructure owned by electrical corporations; wildfire mitigation as a cost driver on electric utility bills; and the need to balance the time value and cost-effectiveness of wildfire mitigation measures into wildfire safety planning and cost-approval processes.
- Requires an electrical corporation, also known as an investor-owned utility (IOU), to minimize the risks its electrical lines and equipment pose in contributing to catastrophic wildfires, taking into account both the time required to implement the proposed mitigations and the amount of risk reduced for the cost and risk remaining.
- Revises the requirements of the WMP to, among other things:
- Require the description of the preventative wildfire mitigation strategies and programs to be adopted by the IOU to also include consideration of their cost-effectiveness – calculated consistent with the direction provided by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in its Safety Model Assessment Proceedings – and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the mitigation measures.
- Require the list of all wildfire risks and drivers for those risks in an IOU’s service territory to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed with which wildfire mitigation measures can and will be deployed by an IOU.
- Require the description of actions the IOU takes to ensure safety, reliability, and resiliency of its system to also include consideration of the cost and time required to achieve those benefits.
- Require the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the CPUC.
- Require, in its description of where and how the utility considered undergrounding, the IOU to explain the reasonableness, including consideration of cost-effectiveness, reliability impacts, and time required for installation compared to other alternatives, of the selected mitigation measure.
EXISTING LAW:
- Establishes the Wildfire Safety Division (WSD) within the CPUC and transfers, by July 1, 2021, all functions of the WSD to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety (OEIS) within the Natural Resources Agency. (Public Utilities Code § 326 and Government Code § 15470-15476)
- Requires each IOU to construct, maintain, and operate its electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment. Additionally, requires each IOU to annually prepare and submit to OEIS a WMP for review and approval. Requires the WMP to include a description of preventative strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk; a description of the metrics used to evaluate the plan’s performance and underlying assumptions for the use of those metrics; and a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks and drivers of those risks throughout the IOU’s service territory. (Public Utilities Code § 8386)
- Requires OEIS to develop and recommend to the CPUC performance metrics to achieve maximum feasible risk reduction to be used to develop the WMP and evaluate an IOU’s compliance with that plan. Defines “maximum feasible” to mean capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors. (Public Utilities Code § 326 and Government Code § 15475)
- Requires the CPUC to establish an expedited utility distribution infrastructure underground program open to a large IOU that submits to the OEIS an undergrounding plan, as specified. Requires OEIS to approve only those plans that demonstrate a substantial increase in electrical reliability and a substantial reduction in wildfire risk. Upon approval by the OEIS, requires the IOU to submit to the CPUC the plan and an application for review that includes:
- Any substantial improvements in safety risk and reduction in costs compared to other hardening and risk mitigation measures over the duration of the plan; the cost targets;
- The cost targets, at a minimum, that result in feasible and attainable cost reductions as compared to the IOU’s historical undergrounding costs;
- How the cost targets are expected to decline over time due to cost efficiencies and economies of scale; and
- A strategy for achieving cost reductions over time.
Additionally, requires a utility with an approved plan to file a progress report with the OEIS and CPUC every six months and hire an independent monitor, selected by the OEIS, to review and assess the utility’s compliance with its plan. Authorizes the CPUC to assess penalties should a utility fail to cure a deficiency identified by the monitor. (Public Utilities Code § 8388.5)
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Committee on Appropriations, this bill could incur unknown, potentially significant costs for OEIS to review and approve WMPs based upon an accurate assessment of cost-efficiency and with possible variations in implementation timelines. The CPUC estimates ongoing costs of $210,000 annually (ratepayer funds) to review any new cost-efficiency data that might be submitted with a future WMP from the six IOUs, as well as to ensure each utility correctly identifies the distinct financial accounting mechanisms used to track WMP implementation costs, avoiding any potential overlap in venue, among other things. Additionally, this bill could have an unknown potential fiscal impact on the state as an electric utility ratepayer.
BACKGROUND:
Electric utility-related wildfires – California has experienced some of the most devastating and costly wildfires over the past decade. Spurred by climate change, the risks for wildfires have increased with larger populations of dead trees – which serve as fuel – from extended drought conditions and bark beetle infestations,[1] more frequent extreme heat and high wind events, and growing encroachment of development into forested and high-fire threat areas.[2] Electrical equipment, including downed power lines, arcing, and conductor contact with trees and grass, can act as ignition sources. Of the 20 most destructive wildfires since 2015, power lines have caused six.[3] Utility-caused fires are often more destructive than those resulting from other sources because many occur in remote areas during high wind events, and those same weather conditions cause the fire to spread quickly, making it difficult to control. In response, the Legislature has passed many statutes to require electric utilities to mitigate the risk of their equipment and operations from igniting wildfires. Additionally, electric utilities shoulder the property liability costs from wildfires ignited by their equipment through the application of inverse condemnation.
A regulatory paradigm for risk evaluation – The CPUC oversees the development of the risk framework each IOU uses as the basis for analyzing their risks. The risk framework involves the submission of Risk Assessment and Mitigation Phase (RAMP) reports by IOUs that document an initial quantitative and probabilistic assessment of an IOU’s top safety risks, plans to mitigate those risks, and estimates of costs associated with the mitigation measure. Occurring in 4-year cycles staggered before a utility’s respective general rate case (GRC) proceeding, RAMP proceedings also provide a public forum for stakeholders to provide comment on a utility’s approach to reducing safety risk and offer alternatives prior to a project spending request being formally submitted for funding authorization as part of a GRC application. The framework also includes the Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (S-MAP), which establishes risk assessment expectations and policies, in part, by comparing approaches, innovations, and capacities among California’s four large electric IOUs in their individual responses to RAMP obligations. The goal of the S-MAP is to make utility decision-making about weighing and mitigating safety risks more quantitatively rigorous, transparent, and objective. The S-MAP continually informs and updates RAMP. Together, the RAMP and S-MAP make up the risk-based decision-making framework that the CPUC uses to inform each IOUs’ GRC and assess whether the utilities are appropriately and reasonably directing resources – the costs of which can be recovered through ratepayers if approved by the CPUC – to mitigating wildfire and safety risks.
Wildfire mitigation plans – In addition to the RAMP and S-MAP processes, wildfire risks and the mitigation measures an IOU proposes to reduce those risks undergo another special review process via the WMP. Initiated by the enactment of SB 1029 (Hill, Chapter 598, Statutes of 2016), the first substantive WMPs were filed with and approved by the CPUC in June 2019 through the rulemaking process. The IOUs were required to file progress reports regarding the implementation of their 2019 plans and the CPUC required the IOUs to take formal actions and file reports to the CPUC if concerns about the effectiveness of any wildfire mitigation action proposed within the WMP arose. Later in 2019, the Legislature revised the scope of the WMP to cover at least a three-year period,[4] and divided oversight of the plans between OEIS (originally the Wildfire Safety Division housed under the CPUC) and the CPUC.[5] OEIS is tasked with assessing safety; they evaluate if proposed actions in the WMP achieve the maximum feasible wildfire risk reduction.[6] The CPUC is then tasked with reviewing cost; they evaluate if the cost of implementing each mitigation effort in the WMP is just and reasonable for purposes of cost recovery. The CPUC also has enforcement authority with regard to an IOU’s progress and performance on their WMPs.
Tradeoffs abound – In February 2024, researchers at the University of California, Berkeley’s Energy Institute at Haas published a report examining the cost-effectiveness, wildfire risk reduction, and impacts on reliability of various wildfire mitigation measures – including system hardening, operational measures, and vegetation management – recently deployed by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E).[7] They found that the deployment of fast-trip settings[8] on high-hazard days is by far the most cost-effective ignition reduction measure, but can leave an estimated 28% of ignition risk unmitigated and risk outage impacts to customers. Enhanced vegetation management (approximately $250,000 per mile) is less effective at mitigating risk, and significantly more expensive than fast-trip settings. The researchers also found that undergrounding power lines (approximately $3.7 million per mile), despite the higher investment cost of the strategy itself and the additional costs utilities receive as a rate of return on infrastructure, is more cost-effective than vegetation management, primarily because undergrounding effectively eliminates ignition risk. Yet, vegetation management comprises the largest non-fuel operations and maintenance cost for utilities today.[9]
Rising utility bills from wildfire mitigation efforts – Since 2013, rates have increased across all three IOUs and exceeded the assumed rate of inflation.[10] Californians currently pay some of the highest utility rates in the country. In March 2023, California had the seventh highest average electricity rates and the tenth highest average residential natural gas prices of any of the states.[11] According to the CPUC, one of the key drivers putting upward pressure on customers’ electric rates since 2021 is wildfire mitigation work.[12] Over the next several years, wildfire risk mitigation costs are projected to continue their upward trend, from both the recovery of past incurred costs and of future projected costs. While these costs encompass a wide variety of wildfire risk costs, including vegetation management efforts and wildfire liability insurance coverage, the high costs of undergrounding, which contributed to hiking the average utility bill by more than $30 a month for PG&E customers earlier this year, are being acutely felt by ratepayers.[13] Another rate increase for customers is expected soon, after the CPUC authorized PG&E’s most recent GRC, which included the undergrounding of 1,230 miles of electric distribution lines.
COMMENTS:
- Author’s statement. According to the author, “While some IOUs contend that undergrounding cable is the safest way to reduce the risk of igniting new wildfires, there are alternatives, such as insulating existing utility cable. Insulating wires, for example, costs an estimated $800,000 per mile, compared to $3 million per mile for undergrounding and may be as, or nearly as effective in preventing wildfire ignitions as undergrounding, and achievable in far less time. While the current IOU wildfire mitigation plan review process does assess the amount of wildfire risk reduction from different strategies, relative to cost, it does not consider the speed with which different strategies can be delivered. Safety today has a different value (time value) than safety in 3 or 10 years. Failure to take this factor into account may result in today’s utility customers paying higher electric utility rates without commensurate benefit from wildfire risk reduction.”
- Muddying the waters. Through legislative efforts, the assessment of WMPs is bisected between OEIS, who evaluates the safety of proposed projects, and the CPUC, who evaluates the costs to implement safety projects. They work in tandem: the WMP requires approval by OEIS before it is evaluated by the CPUC. Since these two entities have different and distinct priorities, often in practice the CPUC authorizes a modified version of the OEIS-approved WMP. For example, in PG&E’s most recent WMP, OEIS approved the utility’s plan to underground 2,100 miles from 2023 to 2026 which would result in reducing ignition risk and de-energization events by approximately 99% in the most threatened areas.[14] Subsequently, PG&E requested rate recovery in their 2023-26 GRC for 2,000 miles of undergrounding – close to the estimation in their approved WMP – at an estimated cost of $5.9 billion. The CPUC then only authorized 1,230 miles of undergrounding, opting to authorize covered conduction installation for the other 778 miles, at a forecasted expenditure of $4.7 billion together. This tension between safety and cost, and the different outcomes inherent in balancing the two, is highlighted by these recent decisions regarding PG&E’s undergrounding plan.
This bill would require the IOUs to evaluate and explain the timeliness and cost-effectiveness of mitigation measures in their WMPs. Supporters of this bill motivate the need for this extra information on mitigation efforts by citing utility undergrounding projects as a source of concern. They contend that waiting several years for undergrounding projects does not reduce the risk of wildfire ignitions quickly enough and comes with too high a price tag as compared to other measures that can be deployed sooner. However, this seemingly presumes that timeliness and cost-effectiveness go hand-in-hand. This may not be the case. Vegetation management is timelier but less cost-effective than undergrounding, according to the report mentioned above. Additionally, the utilities are becoming more efficient with undergrounding: PG&E reported undergrounding 180 miles in 2022, more than double the amount they undergrounded in 2021 (73 miles);[15] and they anticipate achieving more efficiencies with undergrounding in the coming years.14 The proposal in this bill also calls into question how the omission of other factors, such as reliability and social impact, may impact OEIS’ decision-making. The balancing of safety, timeliness, and cost-effectiveness might favor the use of operational mitigation measures such as fast-trip settings and public safety power shutoffs, which are the most cost-effective and quickest to deploy, but would lead to unplanned power outages, impacting reliability and posing immense consequences for public health and commerce.
It is unclear to the committee how the function of OEIS would remain distinct from the CPUC should the office be required to consider cost-effectiveness in its evaluation of WMP actions. Such a direction would be counter to the intent of previous legislative efforts, which sought to establish in OEIS a regulator whose sole focus and mission is safety. However, this bill does not obligate OEIS to select wildfire mitigation actions solely on the basis of cost, nor even to act on the additional information required by this bill as part of the WMP. Rather, it requires the IOUs to use timeliness and cost-effectiveness as elements in their justification for selecting certain mitigation measures in their WMPs. The IOUs already report cost values as part of their WMP filing – either risk-spend efficiency or cost-benefit ratio metrics. OEIS reviews the proposed mitigations on the basis of what will minimize system risk. This bill does not change this fundamental structure of OEIS, but instead may provide some additional clarity into how the IOUs select certain mitigation strategies over others, and allow both OEIS and the CPUC to appropriately weight the IOUs’ proposals.
- Related legislation.
AB 2054 (Bauer-Kahan) would, among other provisions, require all proposed IOU wildfire spending to include a cost-benefit analysis with at least one credible alternative. Status: Set for hearing on July 2nd in the Senate Committee on Energy, Utilities, and Communications.
- Prior legislation.
SB 884 (McGuire) required the CPUC to establish an expedited electric utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program for large IOUs. Required the OEIS, followed by the CPUC, to approve or deny the plan, and required additional actions and reports. Status: Chapter 819, Statutes of 2022.
AB 2889 (Zbur, 2022) would have required IOUs to include, as part of their 2023 WMP, a multiyear undergrounding plan covering at least 7 but no more than 10 years and including methodology for identifying and prioritizing circuits for undergrounding, targets for the undergrounding work, a workforce development plan, and a description of how the undergrounding will reduce the scope and extent of above-ground activities. Status: Held – Assembly Committee on Appropriations.
SB 533 (Stern) required that an IOU’s WMP identify circuits that have frequently been de-energized to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measure taken, or planned to be taken, by the IOU to reduce the need for, and impact of, future de-energization of those circuits. Status: Chapter 244, Statutes of 2021.
SB 70 (Nielsen) required each IOU to additionally include a description of where and how the utility considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a specified fire threat map. Status: Chapter 400, Statutes of 2019.
AB 1054 (Holden), among other provisions, authorized IOUs to establish a memorandum account to track costs incurred to implement the WMP, and to file an application for recovery of any costs accounted in the memorandum account but not yet authorized for recovery in a GRC application. Required the CPUC to consider whether the cost of implementing each IOU’s WMP is just and reasonable in its GRC application, and to review the costs in the memorandum accounts and disallow recovery of those costs the commission deems unreasonable. Status: Chapter 79, Statutes of 2019.
AB 111 (Committee on Budget) created the OEIS within the Natural Resources Agency, under the supervision of a director appointed by the Governor, to oversee each IOU’s WMP. Status: Chapter 81, Statutes of 2019.
SB 901 (Dodd) required a more detailed list of information that a utility must provide in their WMP, including inspection and maintenance, vegetation management, system hardening, de-energization, and metrics for evaluation, among others. Status: Chapter 626, Statutes of 2018.
SB 1028 (Hill) required IOUs to file annual WMPs and required the CPUC to review and comment on those plans. Status: Chapter 598, Statutes of 2016.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Farm Bureau Federation
Clean Power Campaign
Defenders of Wildlife
Junior Philanthropists Foundation
Pacific Forest Trust
Planning and Conservation League
Sierra Forest Legacy
Sonoma Clean Power
The Utility Reform Network (TURN)
Usgbc Los Angeles
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by: Kathleen Chen / U. & E. / (916) 319-2083
Vox; “Beetles, drought, and fires are a ticking time bomb in the West”; July 2021; https://www.vox.com/2021/7/29/22594137/bark-beetles-wildfire-california-oregon-climate-change. ↑
Stanford News; “The shifting burden of wildfires in the United States”; January 2021; https://news.stanford.edu/2021/01/12/shifting-burden-wildfires-united-states/. ↑
State Auditor; “Electrical System Safety: California’s Oversight of the Efforts by Investor-Owned Utilities to Mitigate the Risk of Wildfires Needs Improvement”; March 2022. ↑
AB 1054 (Holden, Chapter 79, Statutes of 2019) ↑
AB 111 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 81, Statutes of 2019) ↑
“Maximum feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors. Public Utilities Code § 326 ↑
Energy Institute at Haas, UC Berkeley; “Risk-Cost Tradeoffs in Power Sector Wildfire Prevention”; February 2024. ↑
Fast trip settings increase the sensitivity of protective devices and equipment that trigger automatic power line outages when a fault is detected. ↑
T&D World; “How Risk-Based Vegetation Management Program Slashes Costs”; January 2023; https://www.tdworld.com/vegetation-management/article/21258571/how-risk-based-vegetation-management-program-slashes-costs ↑
CPUC; “Utility Costs and Affordability of the Grid of the Future: An Evaluation of Electric Costs, Rates, and Equity Issues Pursuant to P.U. Code Section 913.1”; May 2021. ↑
State Auditor; “Electricity and Natural Gas Rates: The California Public Utilities Commission and Cal Advocates Can Better Ensure That Rate Increases are Necessary”; August 2023. ↑
CPUC; 2023 Senate Bill 695 Report; May 2023. ↑
NBC Bay Area; “New PG&E rate hike approved by CPUC”; March 2024; https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/pge-rate-hike-cpuc/3475233/ ↑
PG&E; 2023-2025 Wildfire Mitigation Plan; Page 345 and Table 8.1.2-2; March 2023. ↑
PG&E; “PG&E Hits Significant Milestone: In a Single Year, the Most Powerlines Have Been Put Underground and Energized, Serving and Protecting Customers”; November 2023; https://investor.pgecorp.com/news-events/press-releases/press-release-details/2023/PGE-Hits-Significant-Milestone-In-a-Single-Year-the-Most-Powerlines-Have-Been-Put-Underground-and-Energized-Serving-and-Protecting-Customers/default.aspx ↑
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | SB 1003 |
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1003
Author: Dodd (D)
Amended: 3/21/24
Vote: 21
SENATE ENERGY, U. & C. COMMITTEE: 17-0, 3/19/24
AYES: Bradford, Dahle, Ashby, Becker, Caballero, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Gonzalez, Grove, Limón, Min, Newman, Rubio, Skinner, Stern, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Seyarto
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/16/24
AYES: Caballero, Jones, Ashby, Becker, Bradford, Seyarto, Wahab
SUBJECT: Electrical corporations: wildfire mitigation plans
SOURCE: The Utility Reform Network
DIGEST:
This bill requires electrical corporations to take into account both the amount of wildfire risk reduction for the cost-effectiveness and time value of the proposed mitigation measure within the utility’s wildfire mitigation plan.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Establishes and vests the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. (Article XII of the California Constitution)
- Establishes the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety (OEIS) within the Natural Resources Agency which, as of July 1, 2021, houses the Wildfire Safety Division (WSD) to review the wildfire mitigation plans (WMPs) of electrical corporations and oversee and enforce electrical corporations’ compliance with wildfire safety. Requires the OEIS to adopt guidelines setting forth the requirements, format, timing, and any other matters required to exercise its powers, perform its duties, and meet its responsibilities. (Government Code §§15740 et seq. and 15475.6, Public Utilities Code §§326 and 8385)
- Requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment. (Public Utilities Code §8386(a))
- Requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their WMP to the OEIS for review and approval. Requires the WMPs to include a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a description of the metrics used to evaluate the plan’s performance and underlying assumptions for the use of those metrics, and a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporation’s service territory. (Public Utilities Code §8386(b))
- Requires the CPUC to establish an expedited utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program, and authorizes only those electrical corporations with 250,000 or more customer accounts within the state to participate in the program. Provides these electrical corporations to submit a 10-year plan for undergrounding electrical distribution lines that includes cost comparisons to above ground hardening options, among its many requirements. (Public Utilities Code §8388.5)
This bill:
- Makes several findings and declarations related to: wildfire risks posed by infrastructure owned by electrical corporations, wildfire mitigation as a cost driver on electric utility bills, and the need to account for time value and cost-effectiveness in relation to wildfire mitigation measures.
- Requires electrical corporations to take into account both the need to minimize risks of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires as soon as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
- Revises the requirements of the WMP to, among other things:
- Requires the preventative strategies and programs to also include consideration of the cost effectiveness calculated consistent with the CPUC’s requirements and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs.
- Requires the description of the performance metrics to include a description of how cost-effectiveness and variations in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated.
- Requires the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation.
- Requires the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the CPUC.
- Requires the electrical corporation, for each undergrounding location, to demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate mitigation measure.
Background
- Electric utility-related wildfires. Wildfire represents the single most significant risk for all of California’s investor-owned electric utilities (IOUs), according to the CPUC. Electrical equipment, including downed power lines, arcing, and conductor contact with trees and grass, can act as an ignition source. The risks for wildfires has increased with extended drought conditions, bark beetle infestation that has increased tree mortalities, extreme heat and high wind events, along with increased encroachment of development into forested and high-fire threat areas. In response to a number of catastrophic and deadly wildfires ignited by electric utility infrastructure, including the Camp Fire (2018), the state has passed many statutes to require electric utilities to mitigate the risk of their equipment igniting wildfires. Additionally, electric utilities shoulder the property liability costs from wildfires ignited by their equipment through the application of inverse condemnation.
- Addressing safety risks from energy utility operations. The CPUC oversees the development of the risk framework each IOU uses as basis for analyzing their risks. The risk framework includes a Risk-Assessment and Mitigation Phase (RAMP) whereby CPUC staff scrutinize energy IOU safety-risk threat assessments along with associated proposed mitigation plans and estimated costs and spending requests. The risk reports are submitted to the CPUC on a four-year cycle basis to inform applications and approval of system-wide IOU operating and capital spending. In addition to the RAMP filings, the Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (S-MAP) is a parallel rulemaking track at the CPUC to continually refine and improve the RAMP and its associated mandates. The S-MAP continuously updates utility risk-related requirements and provides interpretations to support California utilities’ capacity building to respond to new and growing risks and makes use of the latest risk-modeling science. RAMP and S-MAP efforts inform each energy IOUs’ general rate case (GRC) and help the CPUC (and stakeholders) assess whether the utilities are properly directing resources to wildfire and safety risks.
- Wildfire mitigation plans. In addition to the RAMP and S-MAP processes, the state has created a separate entity, the OEIS, and a special process to review wildfire-related risks via electric IOU WMPs. Electric IOUs are required to annually file WMPs with guidance by OEIS, which reviews and determines whether to approve these plans and ensures compliance with guidance and statute. Under this framework, the OEIS is responsible for reviewing, approving or denying and overseeing compliance with WMPs, while the CPUC evaluates the reasonableness of costs associated with implementation of the WMPs for purposes of cost recovery and has enforcement authority with regard to electric IOUs’ performance of their WMPs and utility-caused wildfire.
- PG&E recent WMPs. Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) has provided additional detail on their intentions and efforts to underground 10,000 miles of electric distribution lines in areas with high-fire risk. PG&E noted the 10,000 miles would be for distribution electric lines (generally, the lower voltage lines that connect electric service in streets to homes and business in communities, as opposed to the higher voltage transmission lines which connect from electric generating resources). PG&E further stated that undergrounding overhead lines reduces ignition risk by approximately 99 percent and “is the best long-term solution for keeping customers and communities safe.” PG&E acknowledged various criteria for consideration of undergrounding infrastructure, and stated undergrounding as a “preferred option after [electric] line removal or remote grid, where appropriate.”
- SB 884 (McGuire, Chapter 819, Statutes of 2022). SB 884 requires the CPUC to establish a program for expediting the undergrounding of large electric IOUs distribution infrastructure. Electric IOUs with 250,000 or more customer accounts (only PG&E, Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E)) may participate in the program. Electric IOUs wishing to participate in the program must first submit their 10-year plan to OEIS for review who must approve or deny the plan within nine months. If OEIS approves the plan, the electric IOU submits an application to the CPUC for conditional approval of the plan’s costs. The CPUC adopted guidelines for the new undergrounding expedited program, which includes a three-phase process requiring a review of the plan by OEIS and a second review by the CPUC. The electric IOU must compare the costs and benefits of undergrounding to alternative system hardening and risk mitigation measures. The plan must provide information about how forecasted costs are anticipated to decline over time due to efficiencies and economies of scale. The plan must also include a methodology that demonstrates how any avoided costs might be translated into savings for ratepayers.
- Wildfire mitigation as significant driver of costs in electric utility bills. The CPUC in its most recent SB 695 Utility Cost Report has noted that wildfire-related costs are a key driver putting upward pressure on customers’ electric rates. The CPUC has stated that over the next several years, wildfire risk mitigation costs are projected to continue their upward trend. In a recent study by the Energy Institute at Haas “Risk-Cost Tradeoffs in Power Sector Wildfire Prevention”, the authors note that in 2023 WMPs, California electric IOUs proposed investing over nine billion dollars annually to reduce wildfire ignition risk. PG&E’s recent GRC included authorization to underground up to 1200 miles of electric distribution lines. This contributed to the overall rate increases that customers are experiencing this year, roughly $35 per month more for the average utility bill, with another rate increase approved for a portion of the utility’s wildfire-related expenses, and the expectation that more are on the horizon.
Comments
- Costs to underground electric utility infrastructure. While the electric utilities incorporate undergrounding efforts in their WMPs, it is a strategy that had been utilized for very few of their electric circuit lines, largely due to costs in comparison to other mitigation options, and the long-lead time for undergrounding projects. According to data gathered from electric IOUs, and analyzed by the CPUC, converting overhead distribution infrastructure to underground can be 10 times more expensive than installing new distribution overhead lines and undergrounding of electric distribution lines can be eight times more expensive than insulating (covering) the conductors (wires) to prevent them from igniting when contacting vegetation and other foreign objects. Per the data collected from PG&E, SCE and SDG&E, the costs for undergrounding existing overhead distribution infrastructure can range between $1.85 million to $6.072 million per mile.
- Costs of other mitigation measures. Generally, electric utilities are incorporating other wildfire mitigation measures that can be more cost-effective, including covered conductor, sectionalizing circuit lines, vegetation management, and operational controls such as fast-trips and public safety power shutoffs. Per the data collected by the CPUC, installing new overhead distribution infrastructure is much less expensive. On average, installing new overhead distribution infrastructure costs between $634,000-$760,000 per mile, according to the electric utilities’ Rule 21 interconnection unit cost guides. PG&E has shared that their undergrounding efforts are averaging under $3 million per mile and overhead upgrades are averaging just over $1 million. The Energy Institute at Hass report on wildfire mitigation prevention measures notes that undergrounding powerlines, despite the higher investment cost, is more cost effective than pruning and removing vegetation. However, new operational controls, especially the use of “fast-trip” settings is significantly more cost effective than other strategies.
- Tradeoffs abound! The OEIS has proposed some level of review on interim measures that may be needed when mitigation measures can not be implemented within a year. Additionally, OEIS reports an intention to incorporate cost-effectiveness criteria, in line with the CPUC’s updated cost-benefit approach within the RAMP and S-MAP processes. The changes to this bill are intended to ensure that such considerations are required as part of the annual WMP process, without prescribing particular strategies. Supporters of this bill contend that increasing electric utility bills and the contributing costs of wildfire mitigation necessitate a review of WMP measures that take into consideration the time horizon by when they will be implemented and the cost-effectiveness of these measures. The supporters contend that waiting several years for undergrounding projects does not reduce the risk of wildfire ignitions quickly enough and comes with too high a price tag as compared to other measures that can be deployed sooner. In this regard, there are no shortage of tradeoffs, as deploying some of these measures could result in some continued level of wildfire ignition risk for the long-term, though it may come with a lower price tag overall for ratepayers, and a continued risk of outages with the use of operational controls to prevent wildfires.
- Ratepayer impacts. As noted above, efforts to underground electrical infrastructure can be costly. However, the risk of utility equipment igniting fires can also pose significant costs on utility customers given the associated liability and potential impacts of the borrowing costs to the utility. With the growing risks of fires and the expenses associated with other strategies, including the costs of ongoing vegetation management, electric utilities are reassessing these costs and calculations. In the case of PG&E, the utility contends that undergrounding 10,000 miles of electric distribution utility lines will help to better mitigate the risks for the long-term. This bill intends to require the electric IOUs to consider how cost-effectiveness and the time by when a measure will be implemented within its WMPs impacts the electric IOU’s wildfire risk reduction efforts. The author and supporters of this bill contend that such an approach will better ensure that costs to ratepayers are better managed and more judiciously targeted.
Related/Prior Legislation
(See policy committee analysis for fuller list of related legislation.)
SB 884 (McGuire, Chapter 819, Statutes of 2022) required the CPUC to establish an expedited electric utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program for large electrical corporations. Required the OEIS to approve or deny the plan within nine months and requires additional actions and reports.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
- The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) estimates ongoing costs of $210,000 annually (ratepayer funds) to review any new cost efficiency data that might be submitted with a future WMP from the six investor-owned utilities (IOUs), as well as to ensure each utility correctly identifies the distinct financial accounting mechanisms used to track WMP implementation costs, avoiding any potential overlap in venue, among other things.
- Unknown, potentially significant costs for the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety (OEIS) to review and approve of the WMPs based upon an accurate assessment of cost-efficiency and with possible variations in implementation timelines.
- Unknown potential fiscal impact on the state as an electric utility ratepayer. The State of California is an electrical customer, purchasing roughly one percent of the state’s electricity. As such, the state incurs costs when rates increase as well as savings in cases of rate decreases. This bill could potentially have an impact on ratepayers, including the state.
SUPPORT: (Verified 5/15/24)
The Utility Reform Network (source)
California Farm Bureau
Clean Power Campaign
Defenders of Wildlife
Pacific Forest Trust
Planning and Conservation League
Sierra Forest Legacy
U.S. Green Building Council – Los Angeles
OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/15/24)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:
SB 1003 would direct the Office of Electrical Infrastructure Safety (OEIS) to consider the timeliness of [electric] investor owned utility (IOU) electrical infrastructure upgrades when reviewing [electric] IOU wildfire mitigation plans (WMPs), to ensure that the maximum amount of risk from utility sparked wildfires is reduced in the shortest amount of time.
While the current [electric] IOU wildfire mitigation plan review process does assess the amount of wildfire risk reduction from different strategies, relative to cost, it does not consider the speed with which different strategies can be delivered. Safety today has a different value than safety in 3 or 10 years. Failure to take this factor into account may result in today’s utility customers paying higher electric utility rates without commensurate benefit from wildfire risk reduction.
Prepared by: Nidia Bautista / E., U. & C. / (916) 651-4107
5/17/24 11:56:22
**** END ****
SENATE COMMITTEE ON
Senator Anna Caballero, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular Session
SB 1003 (Dodd) - Electrical corporations: wildfire mitigation plans
Version: | Policy Vote: |
Urgency: | Mandate: |
Hearing Date: | Consultant: |
Bill Summary:
This bill would require electrical corporations to take into account both the need to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire as soon as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation within the utility’s wildfire mitigation plan.
Fiscal Impact:
- The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) estimates ongoing costs of $210,000 annually (ratepayer funds) to review any new cost efficiency data that might be submitted with a future WMP from the six investor-owned utilities (IOUs), as well as to ensure each utility correctly identifies the distinct financial accounting mechanisms used to track WMP implementation costs, avoiding any potential overlap in venue, among other things.
- Unknown, potentially significant costs for the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety (OEIS) to review and approve of the WMPs based upon an accurate assessment of cost-efficiency and with possible variations in implementation timelines.
- Unknown potential fiscal impact on the state as an electric utility ratepayer. The State of California is an electrical customer, purchasing roughly one percent of the state’s electricity. As such, the state incurs costs when rates increase as well as savings in cases of rate decreases. This bill could potentially have an impact on ratepayers, including the state. (See staff comments.)
Background:
Wildfire represents the single most significant risk for all of California’s investor-owned electric utilities (IOUs), according to the CPUC. Electrical equipment, including downed power lines, arcing, and conductor contact with trees and grass, can act as an ignition source. The risks for wildfires has increased with extended drought conditions, bark beetle infestation that has increased tree mortalities, extreme heat and high wind events, along with increased encroachment of development into forested and high-fire threat areas. In response to a number of catastrophic and deadly wildfires ignited by electric utility infrastructure, including the Camp Fire (2018), the state has passed many statutes to require electric utilities to mitigate the risk of their equipment igniting wildfires. Additionally, electric utilities bear the property liability costs from wildfires ignited by their equipment through the application of inverse condemnation.
Addressing safety risks from energy utility operations. The CPUC oversees the development of the risk framework each IOU uses as basis for analyzing their risks. The risk framework includes a Risk-Assessment and Mitigation Phase (RAMP) whereby CPUC staff scrutinize energy IOU safety-risk threat assessments along with associated proposed mitigation plans and estimated costs and spending requests. The risk reports are submitted to the CPUC on a four-year cycle basis to inform applications and approval of system-wide IOU operating and capital spending. In addition to the RAMP filings, the Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (S-MAP) is a parallel rulemaking track at the CPUC to continually refine and improve the RAMP and its associated mandates. The S-MAP continuously updates utility risk-related requirements and provides interpretations to support California utilities’ capacity building to respond to new and growing risks and makes use of the latest risk-modeling science. RAMP and S-MAP efforts inform each energy IOUs’ general rate case (GRC) and help the CPUC (and stakeholders) assess whether the utilities are properly directing resources to wildfire and safety risks.
Wildfire mitigation plans. In addition to the RAMP and S-MAP processes, the state has created a separate state agency, the OEIS, and a special process to review wildfire-related risks via electric IOU WMPs. Electric IOUs are required to annually file WMPs with guidance by OEIS, which reviews and determines whether to approve these plans and ensures compliance with guidance and statute. Under this framework, the OEIS is responsible for reviewing, approving or denying and overseeing compliance with WMPs, while the CPUC evaluates the reasonableness of costs associated with implementation of the WMPs for purposes of cost recovery and has enforcement authority with regard to electric IOUs’ performance of their WMPs and utility-caused wildfire.
Wildfire mitigation as significant driver of costs in electric utility bills. The CPUC in its most recent SB 695 Utility Cost Report has noted that wildfire-related costs are a key driver putting upward pressure on customers’ electric rates. The CPUC has stated that over the next several years, wildfire risk mitigation costs are projected to continue their upward trend. In a recent study by the Energy Institute at Haas “Risk-Cost Tradeoffs in Power Sector Wildfire Prevention”, the authors note that in 2023 WMPs, California electric IOUs proposed investing over nine billion dollars annually to reduce wildfire ignition risk. PG&E’s recent GRC included authorization to underground up to 1200 miles of electric distribution lines. This contributed to the overall rate increases that customers are experiencing this year, roughly $35 per month more for the average utility bill, with another rate increase just approved for a portion of the utility’s wildfire-related expenses, and the expectation that more are on the horizon.
Proposed Law:
This bill would require electrical corporations to take into account both the need to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire as soon as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation within the utility’s wildfire mitigation plan. Specifically, this bill would:
- Require electrical corporations to take into account the need to minimize risks of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires as soon as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
- Revise the requirements of the WMP to, among other things:
- Require the preventative strategies and programs to also include consideration of the cost effectiveness calculated consistent with the CPUC’s direction provided by the most recent Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (A.15-05-002, et al., R.20-07-013, or subsequent proceedings), and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs.
- Require the description of the performance metrics to include a description of how cost-effectiveness and variations in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated.
- Require the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation.
- Require the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the CPUC.
- Require the electrical corporation, for each undergrounding location, to demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate mitigation measure.
Related Legislation:
SB 884 (McGuire, Chapter 819, Statutes of 2022) required the CPUC to establish an expedited electric utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program for large electrical corporations. Required the OEIS to approve or deny the plan within nine months and requires additional actions and reports.
SB 533 (Stern, Chapter 244, Statutes of 2021) required electrical corporations, as part of their WMPs, to identify circuits that have frequently been deenergized to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken to reduce the need for future deenergization of those circuits.
SB 70 (Nielsen, Chapter 400, Statutes of 2019) required each electrical corporation’s WMP to additionally include a description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a specified fire threat map.
AB 1054 (Holden, Chapter 79, Statutes of 2019) included numerous provisions related to addressing wildfires caused by electric utility infrastructure, including: bolstering safety oversight and processes, such as required updates to each electric corporation’s WMPs, recasting recovery of costs from damages to third-parties, including the authorization for an electrical corporation and ratepayer jointly funded Wildfire Fund to address future damages, and changes to provisions concerning the workforce of a change of ownership of a full or portion of an electrical or gas corporation.
AB 111 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 81, Statutes of 2019) created OEIS within the Natural Resources Agency, under the supervision of a director appointed by the Governor, to oversee electrical corporations’ wildfire mitigation plans.
SB 901 (Dodd, Chapter 626, Statutes of 2018) addressed numerous issues concerning wildfire prevention, response and recovery, including funding for mutual aid, fuel reduction and forestry policies, WMPs by electric utilities, and cost recovery by electric corporations of wildfire-related damages.
SB 1028 (Hill, Chapter 598, Statutes of 2016) required electric CPUC-regulated utilities to file annual wildfire mitigation plans and requires the CPUC to review and comment on those plans.
Staff Comments:
The State of California is an electrical customer, purchasing roughly one percent of the state’s electricity. As such, the state incurs costs or savings when electricity rates rise or fall. This bill could result in both costs and savings to the state as a ratepayer.
Supporters of this bill contend that increasing electric utility bills and the contributing costs of wildfire mitigation necessitate a review of WMP measures that take into consideration the time horizon by when they will be implemented and the cost-effectiveness of these measures. The supporters contend that waiting several years for undergrounding projects does not reduce the risk of wildfire ignitions quickly enough and comes with too high a price tag as compared to other measures that can be deployed sooner. In this regard, there are no shortage of tradeoffs, as deploying some of these measures could result in some continued level of wildfire ignition risk for the long-term, though it may come with a lower price tag overall for ratepayers, and the risk of outages with the use of operational controls. The Energy Institute at Hass report on wildfire mitigation prevention measures notes that undergrounding powerlines, despite the higher investment cost, is more cost effective than pruning and removing vegetation. However, new operational controls, especially the use of “fast-trip” settings is significantly more cost effective than other strategies. The OEIS has proposed some level of review on interim measures that may be needed for mitigation measures that can not be implemented within a year. Additionally, OEIS reports an intention to incorporate cost-effectiveness criteria, in line with the CPUC’s updated cost-benefit approach within the RAMP and S-MAP processes. The changes to this bill are intended to ensure that such considerations are required as part of the annual WMP process, without prescribing particular strategies.
Efforts to underground electrical infrastructure can be costly. However, the risk of utility equipment igniting fires can also pose costs on utility customers given the associated liability and potential impacts to the borrowing costs to the utility. With the growing risks of fires and the expenses associated with other strategies, including the costs of ongoing vegetation management, electric utilities are reassessing these costs and calculations. In the case of PG&E, the utility contends that undergrounding 10,000 miles of electric distribution utility lines will help to better mitigate the risks for the long-term. This bill intends to require the electric IOUs to consider how cost-effectiveness and the time by when a measure will be implemented within its WMPs impacts the electric IOU’s wildfire risk reduction efforts. The author and supporters of this bill contend that such an approach will better ensure that costs to ratepayers are better managed and more judiciously targeted.
-- END --
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS
Senator Steven Bradford, Chair
2023 - 2024 Regular
Bill No: Hearing Date: 3/19/2024
Author: | |||
Version: | Amended | ||
Urgency: | Fiscal: | ||
Consultant: | |||
SUBJECT:
DIGEST: This bill requires electrical corporations to take into account both the amount of wildfire risk reduction for the cost-effectiveness and time value of the proposed mitigation measure within the utility’s wildfire mitigation plan.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Establishes and vests the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. (Article XII of the California Constitution)
- Requires, by January 1, 2020, the CPUC to establish the Wildfire Safety Division (WSD) to oversee and enforce electrical corporations’ compliance with wildfire safety. Requires, effective July 1, 2021, that all functions of the WSD within the CPUC are transferred to the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety (OEIS). (Public Utilities Code §326)
- Establishes the OEIS within the Natural Resources Agency which, as of July 1, 2021, houses the WSD to review the wildfire mitigation plans (WMPs) of electrical corporations and oversee and enforce electrical corporations’ compliance with wildfire safety. Requires the OEIS to adopt guidelines setting forth the requirements, format, timing, and any other matters required to exercise its powers, perform its duties, and meet its responsibilities. (Government Code §§15740 et seq. and 15475.6, Public Utilities Code §§326 and 8385)
- Requires electrical corporations to construct, maintain, and operate their electrical lines and equipment in a manner that will minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire posed by those electrical lines and equipment. (Public Utilities Code §8386(a))
- Requires electrical corporations to annually prepare and submit their WMP to the OEIS for review and approval. Requires the WMPs to include a description of preventive strategies and programs to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, including consideration of dynamic climate change risk, a description of the metrics used to evaluate the plan’s performance and underlying assumptions for the use of those metrics, and a list that identifies, describes, and prioritizes all wildfire risks, and drivers for those risks, throughout the electrical corporation’s service territory. (Public Utilities Code §8386(b))
- Requires electrical corporations to include in their WMPs where and how they considered undergrounding electric utility lines as part of their plan to mitigate wildfire risks. (Public Utilities Code §8386(c)(15))
- Requires the CPUC to establish an expedited utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program, and authorizes only those electrical corporations with 250,000 or more customer accounts within the state to participate in the program. Provides these electrical corporations to submit a 10-year plan for undergrounding electrical distribution lines that includes cost comparisons to above ground hardening options, among its many requirements. (Public Utilities Code §8388.5)
This bill:
- Makes several findings and declarations related to: wildfire risks posed by infrastructure owned by electrical corporations, wildfire mitigation as a cost driver on electric utility bills, and the need to account for time value and cost-effectiveness in relation to wildfire mitigation measures.
- Requires electrical corporations to take into account the need to minimize risks of its electrical lines and equipment causing catastrophic wildfires as soon as possible and the amount of risk addressed for the cost of the proposed mitigation.
- Revises the requirements of the WMP to, among other things:
- Requires the preventative strategies and programs to also include consideration of the cost effectiveness calculated consistent with the CPUC’s requirements and the relative reduction of exposure to wildfire risk caused by variations in implementation timelines for the preventive strategies and programs.
- Requires the description of the performance metrics to include a description of how cost-effectiveness and variations in implementation timelines for different elements of the plan are incorporated.
- Requires the list to also include particular risks and risk drivers associated with the speed in which wildfire risk mitigation measures can and will be deployed by the electrical corporation.
- Requires the presentation of certain cost-effectiveness measures adopted by the CPUC.
- Requires the electrical corporation, for each undergrounding location, to demonstrate that undergrounding is the most appropriate hardening mitigation measure.
Background
Electric utility-related wildfires. Wildfire represents the single most significant risk for all of California’s investor-owned electric utilities (IOUs), according to the CPUC. Electrical equipment, including downed power lines, arcing, and conductor contact with trees and grass, can act as an ignition source. The risks for wildfires has increased with extended drought conditions, bark beetle infestation that has increased tree mortalities, extreme heat and high wind events, along with increased encroachment of development into forested and high-fire threat areas. In response to a number of catastrophic and deadly wildfires ignited by electric utility infrastructure, including the Camp Fire (2018), the state has passed many statutes to require electric utilities to mitigate the risk of their equipment igniting wildfires. Additionally, electric utilities bear the property liability costs from wildfires ignited by their equipment through the application of inverse condemnation.
Addressing safety risks from energy utility operations. The CPUC oversees the development of the risk framework each IOU uses as basis for analyzing their risks. The risk framework includes a Risk-Assessment and Mitigation Phase (RAMP) whereby CPUC staff scrutinize energy IOU safety-risk threat assessments along with associated proposed mitigation plans and estimated costs and spending requests. The risk reports are submitted to the CPUC on a four-year cycle basis to inform applications and approval of system-wide IOU operating and capital spending. In addition to the RAMP filings, the Safety Model Assessment Proceeding (S-MAP) is a parallel rulemaking track at the CPUC to continually refine and improve the RAMP and its associated mandates. The S-MAP continuously updates utility risk-related requirements and provides interpretations to support California utilities’ capacity building to respond to new and growing risks and makes use of the latest risk-modeling science. RAMP and S-MAP efforts inform each energy IOUs’ general rate case (GRC) and help the CPUC (and stakeholders) assess whether the utilities are properly directing resources to wildfire and safety risks.
Wildfire mitigation plans. In addition to the RAMP and S-MAP processes, the state has created a separate state agency, the OEIS, and a special process to review wildfire-related risks via electric IOU WMPs. Electric IOUs are required to annually file WMPs with guidance by OEIS, which reviews and determines whether to approve these plans and ensures compliance with guidance and statute. Under this framework, the OEIS is responsible for reviewing, approving or denying and overseeing compliance with WMPs, while the CPUC evaluates the reasonableness of costs associated with implementation of the WMPs for purposes of cost recovery and has enforcement authority with regard to electric IOUs’ performance of their WMPs and utility-caused wildfire.
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) announces effort to underground 10,000 miles of electric lines. In July 2021, within days of disclosing to the CPUC that their equipment may have ignited the Dixie Fire that was then-burning in Northern California, PG&E announced a safety initiative to protect communities from the threat of wildfire by converting 10,000 miles of power lines underground in areas with high-fire risk. PG&E’s public statements acknowledge a shift in their perspective given the growing costs and risks of wildfires. While the utility did not release a detailed plan, including how costs would be paid, they noted the intent to underground 1,000 miles per year over 10 years and a desire to work with all stakeholders to develop a plan.
PG&E recent WMPs. PG&E has provided additional detail on their intentions and efforts to underground 10,000 miles of electric lines in their most recent WMPs. PG&E noted the 10,000 miles would be for distribution electric lines (generally, the lower voltage lines that connect electric service in streets to homes and business in communities, as opposed to the higher voltage transmission lines which generally connect from electric generating resources). PG&E further stated that undergrounding overhead lines reduces ignition risk by approximately 99 percent and “is the best long-term solution for keeping customers and communities safe.” PG&E acknowledged various criteria for consideration of undergrounding infrastructure, and stated undergrounding as a “preferred option after [electric] line removal or remote grid, where appropriate.”
SB 884 (McGuire, Chapter 819, Statutes of 2022). SB 884 requires the CPUC to establish a program for expediting the undergrounding of large electric IOUs distribution infrastructure. Electric IOUs with 250,000 or more customer accounts (only PG&E, Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E)) may participate in the program. Electric IOUs wishing to participate in the program must first submit their 10-year plan to OEIS for review who must approve or deny the plan within nine months [as of the writing of the analysis: OEIS has not adopted guidelines for their review]. If OEIS approves the plan, the electric IOU submits an application to the CPUC for conditional approval of the plan’s costs. This month, the CPUC adopted guidelines for the new undergrounding expedited program, which includes a three-phase process requiring a review of the plan by OEIS and a second review by the CPUC. The electric IOU must compare the costs and benefits of undergrounding to alternative system hardening and risk mitigation measures. The plan must provide information about how forecasted costs are anticipated to decline over time due to efficiencies and economies of scale. The plan must also include a methodology that demonstrates how any avoided costs might be translated into savings for ratepayers.
Wildfire mitigation as significant driver of costs in electric utility bills. The CPUC in its most recent SB 695 Utility Cost Report has noted that wildfire-related costs are a key driver putting upward pressure on customers’ electric rates. The CPUC has stated that over the next several years, wildfire risk mitigation costs are projected to continue their upward trend. In a recent study by the Energy Institute at Haas “Risk-Cost Tradeoffs in Power Sector Wildfire Prevention”, the authors note that in 2023 WMPs, California electric IOUs proposed investing over nine billion dollars annually to reduce wildfire ignition risk. PG&E’s recent GRC included authorization to underground up to 1200 miles of electric distribution lines. This contributed to the overall rate increases that customers are experiencing this year, roughly $35 per month more for the average utility bill, with another rate increase just approved for a portion of the utility’s wildfire-related expenses, and the expectation that more are on the horizon.
Comments
Costs to underground electric utility infrastructure. While the electric utilities incorporate undergrounding efforts in their WMPs, it is a strategy that had been utilized for very few of their electric circuit lines, largely due to costs in comparison to other mitigation options, and the long-lead time for undergrounding projects. As a result, generally, electric utilities are incorporating other wildfire mitigation efforts that are can be more cost-effective, including covered conductor, sectionalizing circuit lines, vegetation management, and operational controls such as fast-trips and public safety power shutoffs. However, PG&E has been vocal about advancing the need to underground 10,000 distribution electric lines in combination with some of the other measures.
According to data gathered from electric IOUs, and analyzed by the CPUC, converting overhead distribution infrastructure to underground can be 10 times more expensive than installing new distribution overhead lines and undergrounding of electric distribution lines can be eight times more expensive than insulating (covering) the conductors (wires) to prevent them from igniting when contacting vegetation and other foreign objects. Per the data collected from PG&E, SCE and SDG&E, the costs for undergrounding existing overhead distribution infrastructure can range between $1.85 million to $6.072 million per mile.
Per the data collected by the CPUC, installing new overhead distribution infrastructure is much less expensive. On average, installing new overhead distribution infrastructure costs between $634,000-$760,000 per mile, according to the electric utilities’ Rule 21 interconnection unit cost guides. For transmission, the cost for constructing new overhead transmission ranges from $1 million to $11 million per mile and $6 million to $100 million per mile to convert existing overhead transmission to underground. PG&E has shared that their undergrounding efforts are averaging under $3 million per mile and overhead upgrades are averaging just over $1 million.
Tradeoffs abound! Supporters of this bill contend that increasing electric utility bills and the contributing costs of wildfire mitigation necessitate a review of WMP measures that take into consideration the time horizon by when they will be implemented and the cost-effectiveness of these measures. The supporters contend that waiting several years for undergrounding projects does not reduce the risk of wildfire ignitions quickly enough and comes with too high a price tag as compared to other measures that can be deployed sooner. In this regard, there are no shortage of tradeoffs, as deploying some of these measures could result in some continued level of wildfire ignition risk for the long-term, though it may come with a lower price tag overall for ratepayers, and the risk of outages with the use of operational controls. The Energy Institute at Hass report on wildfire mitigation prevention measures notes that undergrounding powerlines, despite the higher investment cost, is more cost effective than pruning and removing vegetation. However, new operational controls, especially the use of “fast-trip” settings is significantly more cost effective than other strategies. The OEIS has proposed some level of review on interim measures that may be needed for mitigation measures that can not be implemented within a year. Additionally, OEIS reports an intention to incorporate cost-effectiveness criteria, in line with the CPUC’s updated cost-benefit approach within the RAMP and S-MAP processes. The changes to this bill are intended to ensure that such considerations are required as part of the annual WMP process, without prescribing particular strategies.
Ratepayer impacts. As noted above, efforts to underground electrical infrastructure can be costly. However, the risk of utility equipment igniting fires can also pose costs on utility customers given the associated liability and potential impacts to the borrowing costs to the utility. With the growing risks of fires and the expenses associated with other strategies, including the costs of ongoing vegetation management, electric utilities are reassessing these costs and calculations. In the case of PG&E, the utility contends that undergrounding 10,000 miles of electric distribution utility lines will help to better mitigate the risks for the long-term. This bill intends to require the electric IOUs to consider how cost-effectiveness and the time by when a measure will be implemented within its WMPs impacts the electric IOU’s wildfire risk reduction efforts. The author and supporters of this bill contend that such an approach will better ensure that costs to ratepayers are better managed and more judiciously targeted.
Need for amendments. The author and committee may wish to amend the bill as follows:
- Add language in Section 8386 (c)(3) to reference the CPUC’s cost-effectiveness measures adopted within the safety model assessment proceedings.
- Delete the word “hardening” in Section 8386(c)(15) to ensure the utilities provide a comparison of all mitigation alternatives, not solely those related to hardening.
- Make clarifying amendments to the findings and declarations.
- Make clarifying amendments to Section 8386 (a).
Prior/Related Legislation
SB 884 (McGuire, Chapter 819, Statutes of 2022) required the CPUC to establish an expedited electric utility distribution infrastructure undergrounding program for large electrical corporations. Required the OEIS to approve or deny the plan within nine months and requires additional actions and reports.
SB 533 (Stern, Chapter 244, Statutes of 2021) required electrical corporations, as part of their WMPs, to identify circuits that have frequently been deenergized to mitigate the risk of wildfire and the measures taken to reduce the need for future deenergization of those circuits.
SB 70 (Nielsen, Chapter 400, Statutes of 2019) required each electrical corporation’s WMP to additionally include a description of where and how the electrical corporation considered undergrounding electrical distribution lines within those areas of its service territory identified to have the highest wildfire risk in a specified fire threat map.
AB 1054 (Holden, Chapter 79, Statutes of 2019) included numerous provisions related to addressing wildfires caused by electric utility infrastructure, including: bolstering safety oversight and processes, such as required updates to each electric corporation’s WMPs, recasting recovery of costs from damages to third-parties, including the authorization for an electrical corporation and ratepayer jointly funded Wildfire Fund to address future damages, and changes to provisions concerning the workforce of a change of ownership of a full or portion of an electrical or gas corporation.
AB 111 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 81, Statutes of 2019) created OEIS within the Natural Resources Agency, under the supervision of a director appointed by the Governor, to oversee electrical corporations’ wildfire mitigation plans.
SB 901 (Dodd, Chapter 626, Statutes of 2018) addressed numerous issues concerning wildfire prevention, response and recovery, including funding for mutual aid, fuel reduction and forestry policies, WMPs by electric utilities, and cost recovery by electric corporations of wildfire-related damages.
SB 1028 (Hill, Chapter 598, Statutes of 2016) required electric CPUC-regulated utilities to file annual wildfire mitigation plans and requires the CPUC to review and comment on those plans.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:
SUPPORT:
The Utility Reform Network, Sponsor
California Farm Bureau
Planning and Conservation League
OPPOSITION:
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:
SB 1003 would direct the Office of Electrical Infrastructure Safety (OEIS) to consider the timeliness of [electric] investor owned utility (IOU) electrical infrastructure upgrades when reviewing [electric] IOU wildfire mitigation plans (WMPs), to ensure that the maximum amount of risk from utility sparked wildfires is reduced in the shortest amount of time.
While PG&E contends that undergrounding cable is the safest way to reduce the risk of igniting new wildfires, there are alternatives such as insulating existing utility cable. Insulating wires costs an estimated $800,000 per mile, compared to $3 million per mile for undergrounding and may be as effective in preventing wildfire ignitions as undergrounding, and achievable in far less time.
While the current [electric] IOU wildfire mitigation plan review process does assess the amount of wildfire risk reduction from different strategies, relative to cost, it does not consider the speed with which different strategies can be delivered. Safety today has a different value than safety in 3 or 10 years. Failure to take this factor into account may result in today’s utility customers paying higher electric utility rates without commensurate benefit from wildfire risk reduction.
-- END --
Discussed in Hearing
Assembly Standing Committee on Utilities and Energy
Senate Floor
Senate Standing Committee on Energy, Utilities and Communications
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):