Link to the report

Comments About this testimony

Here, PG&E describes its pilot projects. There are 2, each 10 miles long. One is along pipe 132, in Santa Clara County on the peninsula. The other is along pipe 153, in the East Bay.

PG&E says that it is working closely with the 85 homeowners involved. It was 2 months after this was written, in July, before I was initally visited by PG&E. How closely was PG&E working with people simply by being in the planning stages? The October 2 meeting was initiated by homeowners, yet it was a complete waste of time. PG&E has made only one effort to contact us since August, not including the December threat of a Christmas lawsuit. How closely does PG&E think that it is working with us, I wonder.

PG&E stated in this testimony that it takes full responsibility for its errors in patrolling processes. It specifically says "full" responsibility. Due to its mistakes, it has allowed homeowners to build up decades of expectations. Homeowners have spent years and decades building a love affair with their backyards and the vegetation in them. We purchased our homes on the basis of expectations. For years, PG&E allowed us to plan, develop, and nurture our expectations, not even bothering to let us know that it has a 2' pipeline in our backyards. Now, PG&E is attempting to demand that it be allowed to shatter our expectations, and furthermore that no compensation is justified for the action that it feels necessary, even though it admits that the error is entirely due to its mistake. To normal people, taking "full" responsibility must mean more than just being a pretty word. It must mean taking responsibility by sharing in the suffering that it wants to unilaterally impose on those who stand to lose so much for the mistakes that PG&E freely admits are entirely its fault.

Noteworthy Quotations

Page 1-9, Line 25: "we have established an encroachment pilot program to identify and address the immediate pipeline access issues so that preventive maintenance tasks can be completed. The pilot program will also develop recommendations to identify and address potential encroachments and vegetation issues throughout our system with a multi-year, pipeline-by-pipeline, system-wide review. The pilot consisted of a site survey of two 10-mile segments of Bay Area transmission along Lines 132 and 153 to identify possible encroachments or vegetation issues over the pipeline or within the easement. The Line 132 review included 10 miles in Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Mountain View and Palo Alto. The Line 153 review covered 10 miles in Union City, Hayward, San Lorenzo and Oakland. Both areas are highly developed and have 15 foot easements. The site survey identified approximately 85 customer properties with possible encroachments or vegetation issues, including structures such as sheds, as well as large trees and other vegetation. We are now working closely with property owners to address these issues."

Closely? Making threats and not listening to our responses is not our idea of working closely.

Page 1-17, Line 22: "We take full responsibility for the errors in our class location and patrolling processes."

Taking full responsility must mean more than simply claiming to take full responsibility. It should not mean forcing the homeowners involved to take full responsibility for PG&E's sloppiness and mistakes.