►
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting February 10, 2015
10a. City's Initiatives and Activities Related to the CPUC Investigation of the 2010 PG&E Pipeline Explosion
A
B
B
The
purpose
of
tonight's
presentation
is
to
give
the
City
Council
and
the
community,
and
we
hope
that
there
are
numbers
of
people
watching
at
home,
an
update
in
a
report
on
the
now
four
and
a
half
years,
long
process
of
advocacy
in
action
that
the
city
has
undertaken
in
the
wake
of
the
devastating
September
2010.
A
pipeline
explosion
in
our
town,
I
want
to
first
of
all
acknowledge
the
leadership
provided
by
this
city
council.
B
We
we
had
even
then
virtually
no
idea
what
this
city
would
be
challenged
with
in
producing
a
full
recovery
for
this
community.
In
the
wake
of
that
devastation,
then,
and
immediately
after
the
explosion
in
2010,
City
Council
vowed
to
do
everything
within
its
power
to
rebuild
expeditiously
the
neighborhood
that
was
destroyed
and
to
restore
the
community
and
importantly,
to
support
recovery
of
the
victims
and
of
the
community
that
had
been
traumatized.
B
Much
of
that
work
is
actually
still
I'm
sort
of
sorry
to
report
still
in
progress,
but
the
city
has
achieved
some
very,
very
significant
accomplishments
and
we
we
wanted
to
eliminate
some
of
those
tonight.
But
before
we
go
on
to
the
real
meat
of
this
presentation,
I
wanted
to
note
that
this
part
of
our
story
really
begins
in
late
2011
early
2012,
and
focuses
largely
on
the
city's
participation
in
the
proceedings
before
the
California
Public
Utilities
Commission.
B
Prior
to
that,
the
city
received
a
couple
of
very,
very
significant
accomplishments
that
are
not
the
subject
of
this
presentation
tonight,
but
deserve
repeating.
The
first
is
the
establishment
of
a
fifty-million-dollar
trust
fund
in
discussion
with
PG&E,
in
order
that
the
city
had
the
funds
and
could
thereby
pursue
all
of
the
necessary
actions
surrounding
rebuilding
restoring
this
community.
B
Subsequent
to
that,
at
the
cities
initiative
City
negotiated
a
restitution
fund
again
with
PG&E
in
order
to
provide
the
opportunity
for
this
community
as
part
of
its
healing
as
part
of
its
recovery,
to
do
some
good
to
provide
some
benefit
in
the
long
term
to
this
community.
In
order
to
address
the
serious
trauma
and
the
lasting
effects
of
the
devastation
that
occurred
here
in
2010.
B
Purpose
again
of
the
presentation
tonight
is
to
give
you
and
members
of
the
public,
specifically
a
report
on
what
is
going
on.
Why
is
it
important
and
most
critically,
why
does
the
city
of
San
Bruno
remain
fully
engaged
in
continuing
to
press
its
agenda
even
after
well,
after
financial
restitution
has
been
secured
and
funds
to
read
build,
the
physical
devastation
have
been
secured
in
our
in
progress.
B
B
That
was
confirmed
by
the
NTSB
in
the
first
year
after
the
explosion.
The
NTSB's,
you
know,
conducted
an
exhaustive
year-long
investigation
that
determined
the
multiple
causes
of
the
disaster
and,
most
importantly,
that
investigation
revealed
that
this
disaster
was
not
an
accident.
It
was
not
a
tragic
accident
that
could
not
have
been
predicted
or
prevented.
In
fact,
what
caused
the
explosion
was
multiple
deficiencies,
largely
on
the
part
of
Pacific
Gas
and
Electric
Company,
as
well
as
on
the
part
of
the
cpuc
which
organization
failed
to
effectively
and
rigorously
regulate.
B
In
the
wake
of
the
NTSB
investigation,
its
conclusions,
it's
finding
its
in
its
recommendations,
the
city
identified
five
specific
objectives
that
we
guide
its
work
and
would
attempt
to
right
the
wrong
to
set
the
stage
so
that
the
people
of
San,
Bruno
and
of
fornia
need
not
worry
whether
something
like
what
happened
here
might
possibly
happen
again.
Those
five
objectives
have
continued
to
guide
the
city's
effort
and
to
focus
its
work
effort
out
of
all
of
the
avenues
that
we
could
track
down.
B
First,
investigate
the
cause
of
the
explosion,
as
I
mentioned,
that's
been
completed
by
the
NTSB,
but
remains
in
the
latter
stages
of
progress
through
the
NT
I'm.
Sorry
through
the
CPUC,
correct
and
remediate
need
negligent
practices
and
conduct
and
as
we
go
forward
in
our
presentation
tonight,
you'll
see
that
that
remains
very
much.
An
open
issue,
with
new
discoveries
being
made
virtually
on
a
daily
basis.
Even
now,
four
and
a
half
years
later,
penalize
appropriately
and
again.
B
I
would
just
mention
that
this
includes
not
only
the
compensation
and
the
restitution
that
the
city
has
received,
but
more
specifically
addresses
the
actual
fines
and
penalties.
It
will
be
assessed
through
the
CPUC
against
pge,
not
only
as
a
punishment,
if
you
will,
but
as
a
marker
for
utility
companies,
not
only
in
California
but
across
the
nation,
to
identify
that
poor
behavior,
poor
management
of
system
assets
can
result
in
devastating
financial
consequence
and
I
would
pause
here
to
just
note
for
a
moment
that
under
California
law,
fines
and
penalties
do
not
affect
rates.
B
So
shareholders
will
be
responsible
for
those
costs
that
are
directly
attributable
to
fines
and
penalties.
Those
costs
will
not
result
in
increase
rates
for
customers
of
the
utility
system.
Importantly,
ensuring
safety
improvements
it.
It
remains
a
guidepost
in
city's
work
effort
and
taking
efforts
as
that
that
we
can,
in
conjunction
with
others,
to
reform
the
regulatory
system,
and
that
in
large
measure
is,
is
a
part
and
parcel
of
what
our
conversation
with
you
tonight
is
about.
B
B
Second,
the
city
vowed
to
correct
and
remediate
negligent
practices.
The
cpuc
has
found
over
3000
separate
violations
of
law
occurring
over
a
period
extending
back
over
50
years.
70
corrective
actions
have
been
identified
as
needed,
and
a
proposed
1.4
billion
dollar
penalty
and
fine
is
pending
for
decision
before
the
California
Public
Utilities
Commission.
B
B
This
slide
shows
one
example
of
the
additional
issues
that
have
been
raised
that
have
been
identified
and
have
been
adjudicated
through
the
California
Public
Utilities
Commission,
resulting
in
fines
and
penalties
as
to
the
city's
objective
related
to
penalizing
appropriately,
the
fines
and
penalties
that
are
proposed
to
be
assessed
against
pge
represent
a
historic
level
actually
prior
to
the
explosion.
Here
in
San
Bruno
and
the
fine
and
the
proceedings
in
which
San
Bruno
has
engaged.
B
There
have
been
a
really
very
minimal
amount
of
fines
and
penalties
assessed
and,
in
fact,
as
we
have
continued
participation
in
these
proceedings,
we
have
actually
I
think
we
can
take
pride
in
the
fact
that
the
CPUC
recognizes
and
has
begun
to
step
up
to
evaluate
and
penalize
appropriately
again.
This
penalty
includes
not
only
monetary
sanctions
but
corrective
measures,
and
the
city
continues
to
call
for
full
and
complete
completion
of
the
NTSB
recommendations.
B
The
city
of
san
bruno
inc
importantly
continues
to
push
for
to
improvements
that
that
address
directly
the
needs
and
the
objectives
that
we
outlined
several
years
ago,
but
are
not
yet
assured,
and
those
are
the
establishment
of
an
independent
monitor
at
the
California
Public
Utilities
Commission,
to
assure
oversight
of
the
Commission's
activities
and
its
regulatory
procedures
in
order
to
establish
and
assure
the
that
a
culture
of
safety
takes
hold
and
begins
to
frame
and
shape
all
of
the
decisions
in
the
activities
that
the
CPUC
is
responsible.
For
again,
that
is
not
yet
the
case.
B
That
pipeline
safety,
trust
known
as
the
national
pipeline
safety
trust,
has
been
a
vigorous
advocate
for
pipeline
safety,
for
legislative
initiative
and
for
regulatory
reform
across
our
nation.
Their
work
is
important.
It
is,
it
is
a
very
small
organization
and
although
it's
had
a
mighty
impact,
its
work
needs
particular
focus
in
California.
C
Mr.
mayor
members
of
the
City
Council,
what
you
see
on
your
screen
is
the
lawsuit
that
you
authorized
the
city
to
file
against
the
public
utilities,
commission
for
the
disclosure
of
public
records
and,
as
you
know,
that
lawsuit
came
only
after
multiple
and
lengthy
attempts
were
made
by
the
city
to
get
the
Public
Utilities
Commission
to
comply
with
state
law
regarding
the
disclosure
of
public
records.
C
Ultimately,
as
you
also
know
and
authorized,
the
case
was
settled.
It
was
resolved
the
settlements,
a
matter
of
public
record
and
as
a
result
of
that
settlement
about
seven
thousand
emails
were
disclosed
by
the
PUC.
Those
emails
showed
about
40
instances.
That's
40
instances
of
what
the
city
felt
were
improper
ex
parte
communications
and
just
to
explain
for
the
benefit
of
the
public.
An
improper
ex
parte
communication
is
one
in
which
executive
level,
members
of
the
public
utilities
commission
we're
having
conversations
undisclosed
conversations
with
the
same
level
or
similar
level.
C
Pg&Amp;E
did
conduct
their
own
internal
investigation,
apparently
and
disclosed
to
the
media
that
they
had
reviewed
65,000
emails.
They
disclosed
some
of
those
emails
to
the
media
and
when
asked
for
the
rest
of
those
emails
by
the
city
of
San
Bruno,
they
indicated
they
would
not
provide
those.
However,
as
you
can
see,
those
emails
supported
the
NTSB's
conclusion
and
I
guess
at
that
time
we
could
say
was
almost
an
assumption
because
they
didn't
have
a
lot
of
evidence
to
support
it.
C
It
certainly
supported
their
conclusion
that
the
relationship
between
the
regulator
and
the
regulated
entity
was
far
too
close
for
comfort.
The
emails
that
you
see
on
the
screen
demonstrate
an
inappropriate
familiarity
that
you
might
see
between
colleagues
or
between
friends
and
not
between
an
entity
that
is
supposed
to
regulate
a
public
utility
responsible
for
the
distribution
of
gas
and
electric
power
throughout
the
state
of
California.
C
In
any
event,
when
the
city
requested
that
PG&E
provide
those,
apparently
65,000
emails
to
the
city,
a
PG&E
refused
and
the
city
had
to
go
to
the
administrative
law
judge,
to
request
that
those
emails
be
produced
directly
to
the
city
and
ultimately,
they
were
ordered
to
be
produced.
And
some
of
those
examples
that
you
see
on
the
screen
right
now
are
emails
that
I
think
are
best
described
as
alarming
in
terms
of
their
content.
C
The
very
first
one
is
something
that's
an
example
of
the
the
parties
discussing
how
they're
going
to
violate
the
ex
parte
rules,
which
they
otherwise
tell
everybody
that
they
either
follow
or
don't
know
enough
whether
to
follow
or
not.
So
this
is
an
example
of
something
in
which
the
city
believes
should
not
be
occurring.
You
shouldn't
have
parties
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
violate
the
rules
and
then
the
second
email
on
there,
I
think,
is
just
shortly
after
the
explosion
and
I
think
it
speaks
for
itself.
C
Let
me
pause
for
just
a
minute
and
ask
the
question:
what
what
did
the
city
learn
from
its
Public
Records
Act
case
at
the
settlement
and
the
subsequent
fall
out?
I?
Think
we've
really
learned
one
major
thing,
and
that
is
that
the
Public
Utilities
Commission
is
not
accountable
to
the
public,
your
constituents
and
there's
three
main
reasons
for
that.
The
first
reason
I
should
say
all
of
those
reasons
are
grounded
state
statute
in
state
law
passed
by
the
legislature.
C
There
is
a
presumption
of
confidentiality
for
all
information,
and
that
is
one
of
the
basis
that
the
Public
Utilities
Commission
used
to
deny
our
requests
for
information.
They
said,
look
at
state
law.
It
says
it's
confidential.
We
can't
possibly
produce
it
because
then
we'd
be
violating
state
law.
Well,
that
is
the
opposite
of
the
presumption
for
all
local
agencies,
the
city
of
San
Bruno
and
every
other
state
agency.
C
C
The
second
state
law
says
that
members
of
the
public,
your
constituents,
while
they
can
sue
the
city
in
superior
court-
and,
incidentally,
you
had
a
member
of
the
public
coming
up
tonight,
saying
that
that
she
may
be
interested
in
doing
that.
While
those
individuals
can
sue
you
in
superior
court,
they
can't
sue
the
Public
Utilities
Commission
in
superior
court.
They
can
only
sue
the
Public
Utilities
Commission
about
important
matters
in
the
appellate
court
or
the
Supreme
Court
of
California.
C
C
That
is
the
opposite,
of
course,
for
every
other
local
agency.
In
the
state,
and
virtually
every
other
state
agency,
where
members
of
the
public
who
are
aggrieved
by
a
decision
can
simply
file
a
lawsuit
in
superior
court,
it's
local,
its
accessible
it's
inexpensive
and
you
can
usually
find
a
lawyer
to
represent
you
not
the
case
in
appellate
court.
C
The
last
thing
we
learned
is
that,
while
the
ex
parte
rules
have
not
been
followed,
actually
there's
a
deeper
problem-
local
agencies,
like
you,
when
you
have
ex
parte
contacts
with
people
coming
to
you
for
development
applications
or
other
businesses.
You
are
required
to
report
those
communications
before
you
make
a
decision
and
in
fact,
you'll
remember
both
on
the
Planning
Commission
agenda
and
on
your
City
Council
agenda
before
development
applications.
We
have
a
section
that
encourages
all
of
the
council
members
to
disclose
their
ex
parte
contacts.
That's
not
the
rule.
C
At
the
cpuc
at
the
CPUC,
the
commissioners
don't
have
to
report
any
ex
parte
contacts.
It's
the
private
entity
that
has
to
report
the
ex
parte
contacts.
So
then,
you
might
ask
yourself
whats
the
remedy.
If
the
private
entity
doesn't
report
the
ex
parte
contacts
and
the
answer,
is
there
really
isn't
any
because
a
all
of
the
communications
are
confidential
and
B,
even
if
they
weren't
you
can't
sue
them
in
Superior
Court?
C
C
We
also
have
ongoing
criminal
investigations
of
both
PG&E
the
corporation
and
a
number
of
individuals,
so
those
proceedings
are
are
going
forward
and
we'll
we'll
have
to
wait
and
see
what
happens
so.
I
think
it's
safe
to
say
that
the
city's
case
and
the
City
Council's
courage
in
taking
a
perhaps
risky,
perhaps
unpopular
decision
to
go
ahead
and
Sue.
C
Another
public
agency,
which
is
an
unusual
thing
to
do,
really
was
the
catalyst
for
all
of
the
many
things
that
occurred
and
the
revelations
that
have
opened
up
since
then
and
have
exposed
the
fact
that
it's
state
law
that
needs
to
be
changed
in
order
to
truly
reformed
the
Public
Utilities
Commission.
So
at
this
point,
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
Connie.
So
she
can
conclude
the
presentation,
great.
B
Commission,
commissioner
picker
president
picker
has
committed
to
a
new
commission
code
of
conduct
under
his
leadership.
The
Commission
recently
ordered
the
release
of
the
65,000
emails,
as
a
city
attorney
reported
just
a
moment
ago,
and
the
Commission
has
begun
to
acknowledge
inappropriate
illegal
access
and
relationship
with
utilities
regulated
under
their
jurisdiction.
B
Commitment
to
change
is
a
good
thing.
It's
a
great
start.
It's
not
the
same
thing
as
actual
tangible,
sustainable
change,
that's
what's
necessary
and
that's
what
this
initiative
is
really
all
about.
I've
been
approached
a
number
of
times,
so
people
have
said
well,
you
have
devoted
you.
The
city
of
san
berdo
has
devoted
a
tremendous
amount
of
time,
effort
and
resource
to
this
to
the
various
actions
and
initiatives
that
you've
undertaken
and
something
is
really
happening
now
see.
Numbers
of
people
are
gone.
B
People
are
saying
the
right
thing,
you've
done
it,
isn't
it
isn't
that
what
you
were
looking
for
it
again,
I
would
say.
Yes,
it's
a
great
start,
and
it
takes
time
to
assure
that
the
tangible
reform
actually
takes
hold
and
that
the
change
that
is
sorely
needed
to
protect
the
safety
of
citizens
of
this
state
actually
take
hold,
and
so
we
can
be
proud.
Numbers
of
important
initiatives
have
borne
fruit.
B
They've
been
completed
and
they've
made
a
difference
without
ooh,
without
attempting
to
signal
the
what
we
haven't
done
in
favor
of
or
as
a
priority
over
the.
What
we
have
done
I
would
I
would
jump
to
the
bottom
of
this
list
and
say
that
there
is
still
a
fair
amount
of
work
to
do
by
us
by
others
to
assure
that
the
penalty
actually
results
in
a
safer
system.
Good
progress
result
not
yet
achieved,
and
importantly,
reform
of
a
broken
system,
a
broken
system
of
utility
operation
and
a
broken
system
of
utility
regulation.
B
Our
initiatives
have
resulted
in
a
conclusion,
among
others,
that
actual
change
will
require
legislative
action
and
initiative
that
again
is
appearing
to
take
hold
our
legislature,
Jerry
Hill.
In
particular.
Now
a
state
senator
has
been
singularly
active
and
aggressive
in
forwarding
legislation.
Numbers
of
other
legislators
have
begun
to
take
notice
and
to
take
action
that
we
hope
will
actually
begin
to
change
the
rules
by
which
the
CPUC
operates
and
strengthen
the
effect
of
the
regulatory
environment.
B
Lastly,
I'd
like
to
just
acknowledge
the
recognition
that
the
city
has
received
I
think
it's
very
fair
to
say-
and
this
is
just
some
among
many
acknowledgments-
that
the
city
has
has
received
that
have
been
openly
discussed.
I
think
it's
fair
to
say:
had
it
not
been
for
the
cities
initiative
to
take
that
difficult
action
to
sue
the
Public
Utilities
Commission.
B
Many
of
the
pieces
of
information
that
belong
in
this
puzzle
would
still
be
under
under
cover.
We
would
not
have
documented
tangible
proof
of
the
finding
that
the
NTSB
made
three
and
a
half
years
ago
that
a
too
cozy
relationship
between
the
regulator
and
the
regulated
exists
and
that
that
was
a
clear
and
tangible
cause
of
the
explosion
that
occurred
here
in
san
berdo.
B
So,
while
the
city
has
has
been
acknowledged,
I
think
you
should
take
personal
credit
for
this
as
well.
On
behalf
of
the
leadership
of
the
community
of
san
bruno
and
recognizing
that
preventing
tragedy
or
doing
everything
that
we
can
to
prevent
tragedy
from
happening
elsewhere
is
a
critical
piece
of
this
community's
healing
a
peace
and
security
that
no
amount
of
restitution
funds
can
buy
or
secure
for
the
citizens
of
san
berdo,
who
have
been
so
irreparably
damaged
before
I
close
I
just
like
to
introduce
and
acknowledge
the
work
of
three
people
there
was
for
people.
B
D
Don't
have
any
questions
I
just
like
to
say
four
and
a
half
years
and
seeing
up
here
with
this
team
and
mr.
mayor,
you
have
been
uncanny
and
almost
perfect
in
how
we
should
have
acted.
I
can't
think
of
any
other,
better
ways
but
proud
of
how
you've
represented
the
city
and
how
you've
dealt
with
not
only
running
a
city,
but
also
this
unusual
and
catastrophic.
A
Is
you
bring
it
back
to
that
evening
when
eight
people
lost
their
lives
and
that's
what
this
is
all
about
and
I've
said
before
you
know
in
san
bruno
way
of
eight
angels
on
our
shoulders
and
a
lot
of
other
people,
and
you
saw
tonight
on
the
presentation,
have
a
lives
and
their
conscience
we're
finding
out
a
lot
of
those
people,
don't
have
much
of
a
conscience
but
we're
trying
to
make
it
different.
So
we
owe
it
to
them.