Proceeding Number I.14-11-008 CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA REPLY BRIEF

ABSTRACT: Re: BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Investigation And Order to Show Cause on the Commission’s Own Motion into the Operations and Practices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company with Respect to Facilities Records for its Natural Gas Distribution System Pipelines, the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA REPLY BRIEF document copy is embedded. 

City of Carmel Reply Brief

Filing Date 4-01-16
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA REPLY BRIEF

Proceeding Number I.14-11-008 CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA OPENING BRIEF

ABSTRACT: Re: BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Investigation And Order to Show Cause on the Commission’s Own Motion into the Operations and Practices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company with Respect to Facilities Records for its Natural Gas Distribution System Pipelines, the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA OPENING BRIEF document copy is embedded. CONCLUSION The explosion in Carmel was caused by multiple mistakes and failures to act. PG&E's testimony does not dispute the facts. Instead, the utility stresses its corrective actions it has done. It's too little too late, promises do not negate what happened in Carmel. PG&E's proffered improvements may help to reduce the severity in the fines and hopefully will prevent future incidents, but it does not change the fact that violations of federal and state law occurred on March 3, 2014.
The Mountain View incident should have been a key warning sign. It was a similar situation of welding on steel pipe with an unmapped plastic inserted causing a gas leak. After the Mountain View incident, PG&E internal investigation concluded more work needed to be done in the field to prevent futures incidents from occurring. Yet PG&E did nothing. PG&E's inaction, along with many other layers of weakness in their protocol and records, caused this explosion in Carmel's backyard. PG&E justified its inactions by claiming Mountain View was perceived as an isolated event that caused no major property damage. In other words, PG&E's plan was to also wait until severe property damage or death occurred in order to take corrective action. The law requires more.
Carmel cannot stress enough the serious anxiety this caused the residents of Carmel. This explosion due to shoddy risk analyses and records management has put this community on edge. Carmel's city staff and electric officials have spent hundreds of hours in response to this explosion. Carmel did not want to become involved in PG&E's distribution system problems, but was forced into this proceeding in response to its residents' concerns over their health and safety. Therefore, Carmel asks that the Commission issue the fines and remedies outlined in SED and Carmel's brief. Carmel is hopeful that these fines and penalties will help to prevent future threats to life and limb.

Exhibit A (excerpts)

CARMEL'S VIOLATION CALCULATIONS

1.) Castro Valley-Incident Date: 9/17/201 TOTAL FINES $40.400 million

2.) Morgan Hill-Incident Date: 6/21/2012 TOTAL FINES $170.434 million

3.) Montague Expressway and Great Mall Parkway, Milpitas-Incident Date: 10/10/2012 TOTAL FINES $2.05 million

4.) Great Mall Parkway, Milpitas-Incident Date: 3/4/2013 TOTAL FINES $127,510 million

5.) Mountain View-Incident Date: 7/30/2013 TOTAL FINES $174.746 million

6.) Carmel-Incident Date: 3/3/2014 TOTAL FINES $136.630 million

TOTAL FOR ALL $651.770 million

City of Carmel-By-The-sea Opening Brief 02-26-16

Filing Date 02-26-16
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA OPENING BRIEF

Carmel's Request for Official Notice in Support of Opening Brief 02-26-16

Filing Date 02-26-16

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA'S REQUEST FOR OFFICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPENING BRIEF

Proceeding Number I.14-11-008 CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA'S OPPOSITION TO PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

ABSTRACT: Re: BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Investigation And Order to Show Cause on the Commission’s Own Motion into the Operations and Practices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company with Respect to Facilities Records for its Natural Gas Distribution System Pipelines, the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA'S OPPOSITION TO PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY document copy is embedded.
INTRODUCTION
In typical heavy handed manner, PG&E rushes in just days before the administrative hearing is set to begin on January 19, 2016, and asks this Commission to compel further discovery responses from Intervenor Carmel-by-the-Sea ("Carmel") which are specifically derived from its attorney initiated interview of former employee Leslie Banach, Director of Information Management Compliance. Carmel has advised PG&E that Carmel did not receive any documents, either in hard copy or electronic, from Ms. Banach. Undaunted, PG&E asks the Commission to compel the release of all the information gained as a result of Carmel's attorney self-initiated interview of Ms. Banach, which is subject to the work product privilege. (Code of Civil Procedure § 2018.030(b).) This interview, which occurred on October 29, 2015, was also attended by Police Chief Michael Calhoun and is also privileged under the official information privilege.. (Evidence Code § 1040).

CONCLUSION

Cannel respectfully requests that the Commission deny the motion to compel and  not breach the attorney work product privilege held by Carmel.

Carmel's Opposition to Pg&e's Motion to Compel Discovery 01-11-16

Filing Date 01-11-16

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA'S OPPOSITION TO PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

Declaration of Britt Strottman Carmel 01-11-16

Filing Date 01-11-16

DECLARATION OF BRITT STROTTMAN IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA'S OPPOSITION TO PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

EXHIBIT B 01-11-16

Filing Date 01-11-16

EXHIBIT B

Proceeding Number I.14-11-008 CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA'S REQUEST FOR OFFICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO PACIFIC GAS &ELECTRIC'S MOTION TO COMPEL

ABSTRACT:  Re: BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Investigation And Order to Show Cause on the Commission’s Own Motion into the Operations and Practices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company with Respect to Facilities Records for its Natural Gas Distribution System Pipelines, the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA'S REQUEST FOR OFFICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO PACIFIC GAS &ELECTRIC'S MOTION TO COMPEL document copy is embedded.  Pursuant to Rule 13.9 of the California Public Utilities Commission's ("Commission" or 12 "CPUC") Rules of Practice and Procedure ("Rules") and Evidence Code § 452(h) and in accordance with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1306(c), the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea requests official notice of the following document: The United States of America's Motion in Limine No. 6 to Admit Evidence of Leslie McNiece filed in the matter of United States of America v. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, USDC Case No. CR 14-00175 on January 11,  2016.

Carmel's Request for Official Notice01!20!16

 Filing Date 01-20-16

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA'S REQUEST FOR OFFICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO PACIFIC GAS &ELECTRIC'S MOTION TO COMPEL

Proceeding Number I.14-11-008 CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CLOSING STATEMENT

ABSTRACT:  Re: BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Investigation And Order to Show Cause on the Commission’s Own Motion into the Operations and Practices of Pacific Gas and Electric Company with Respect to Facilities Records for its Natural Gas Distribution System Pipelines, the CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CLOSING STATEMENT document copy is embedded. Carmel supports SED in its prosecution. PG&E's arguments and witnesses' testimony presented at the evidentiary hearings in an effort to show the utility did not violate the law ring hollow and were in bad faith, so much so that Carmel believes PG&E submitted misrepresentations to the Commission. Carmel did not ask to spend valuable City resources to hold PG&E accountable. PG&E has continued to not accept responsibility for the dangerous explosion throughout the OIL, Carmel hopes the Commission can see through PG&E's too little too late excuses and promises regarding the safety of its distribution system.

Carmel's Closing Statement 01-25-16

 Filing Date 01-25-16

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CLOSING STATEMENT