“Se ancorone California State Senate ONO BAU MIKE MeGUIRE COMMITTEE ON ven se ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS ALES. warren BEN HUESO nn conan Seamer SUBCOMMITTEE ON GAS, ELECTRIC AND TRANSPORTATION SAFETY JERRY HILL ‘CHAIRMAN October 9, 2019 President Marybel Batjer Commissioner Martha Guzman Aceves Commissioner Liane M. Randolph Commissioner Clifford Rechtschaffen Commissioner Genevieve Shiroma California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Aventie San Francisco, CA 94102 RE: Need for Review of Public Safety Power Shutoffs Dear President Batjer and Commissioners Aceves, Randolph, Rechtschatfen, and Shiroma, Today marks an unprecedented turn in the history of electricity service in California, PG&E informed us earlier this week that it would proactively shut off power to an enormous swath of the state. As of yesterday evening over 800,000 customer accounts were forecasted to be impacted — roughly equating to over two million Californians experiencing a blackout that could last for multiple days. This proactive de-energization, or public safety power shutoff (PSPS), began in the early hours this morning and will continue throughout this afternoon. It may be several days before power is restored to affected areas. Many questions remain unanswered as the state reels with the consequences of this decision by PG&E, chief among them why is PG&E alone in making this decision? I hope California never experiences another massive wildfire like what has occurred over the past few years, and I appreciate every tool that enables us to prevent these fires and protect the state. However, I strongly disagree with the binary position currently offered by PG&E — they can turn the power off and shut down the economy and livelihoods of millions in California, an action which may protect us from wildfire; or they can roll the dice and continue with the lights on, and risk an enormous fire starting from their power lines. This situation is not acceptable nor sustainable. PSPS must be a surgical, last resort measure. Ensuring they are as precise and infrequent aspossible is dependent upon the utility’s ability to monitor conditions in real-time (via weather stations and ground crews), their having a full understanding of the risks associated with their system, and their system being designed to isolate power losses to as smal] an area as possible. The scale proposed by PG&E’s PSPS suggests many of these conditions are still not in place for the utility. This cannot continue. Back in August, the Senate Subcommittee on Gas, Electric, and Transportation Safety held a hearing on PSPS where we voiced concern over the planning of these PSPS events. I called on the CPUC to ensure PSPS was used judiciously, that the safety impacts on communities were lessened, and that PSPS was a temporary, not long-term tool. The hearing additionally raised the need for the CPUC to conduct post-event reviews so that mistakes made during one event will not carry over to the next, and successes may be built upon and shared. Troublingly, according to your PSPS website, the Commission has conducted only one PSPS review since PSPS events formally began in San Diego in 2013. The CPUC’S timeline for reviewing the other PSPS events to date remains uncertain, although your website notes the CPUC will perform “a thorough review of de-energization events as they occur.” How are we meant to know whether or not the scale and circumstances of a PSPS event are justified if our utility regulator is not even analyzing the event or its impact? ask that the CPUC begin these post-event reviews, in coordination with the Office of Emergency Services, immediately. Should you need resources to help you in this effort, I stand ready to support. Jeby Ti Senator, 13th District Sincerely, cc: Mark Ghilarducci, Director, Governor's Office of Emergency Services Service List R. 18-12-05