{"id":10574,"date":"2014-09-17T09:54:33","date_gmt":"2014-09-17T13:54:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/?p=10574"},"modified":"2014-09-17T09:58:13","modified_gmt":"2014-09-17T13:58:13","slug":"demanding-the-state-puc-get-a-friendly-judge-a-best-practice-for-utilities","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2014\/09\/demanding-the-state-puc-get-a-friendly-judge-a-best-practice-for-utilities.html","title":{"rendered":"Demanding the state PUC get a friendly judge: a best practice for utilities?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\r\n\r\n\"300x225<\/a>\r\nA utility didn’t stop at blowing up a Calfornia neighborhood,\r\nit also demanded the Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) get a favorable judge\r\nfor that 2010 San Bruno natural gas pipe explosion.\r\nThe CPUC president’s chief of staff just last year wrote slides\r\npraising his Legacy as Best Practices.\r\nDoes that legacy include suborning justice?\r\nHe’s still there, although she was fired, and three PG&E executives\r\n“ended their employment”.\r\nHow many other PG&E and other utility executives and CPUC and other\r\nstate regulators follow those same Best Practices?\r\n

\r\nEllen Knickmeyer, Associated Press, 15 September 2014,\r\nPG&E Officials Removed for Improper Communications<\/a>,\r\n

\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/a>\r\nFour senior officials with Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state\r\ncommission regulating it were removed or resigned over emails\r\nreleased Monday showing the utility and state regulators appeared to\r\nnegotiate which judge would be assigned to hear one of the utility’s\r\nrate cases.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\nThe emails show the commission ultimately assigned to the case a\r\njudge for whom PG&E had expressed a preference, rather than another\r\njudge who PG&E said “has a history of being very hard on us.”\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/a>\r\nAlso Monday, California Public Utilities Commission president\r\nMichael Peevey, who was included in part of the January email\r\nexchange, removed himself from involvement in that rate case and in\r\nanother, bigger case pending before the utility commission involving\r\nPG&E, California’s largest utility.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\nThe developments deepen the growing controversy surrounding the\r\nstate utilities commission’s oversight of the utility in the\r\naftermath of a 2010 explosion of a PG&E natural-gas pipeline that\r\nkilled eight people in the San Francisco suburb of San Bruno.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\nIn July, earlier emails released at the request of San Bruno city\r\nofficials showed Peevey and his staffers consulting with the utility\r\non matters including how big PG&E’s fine should be in the blast. The\r\ncommission’s decision on that fine is pending.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\nOn Monday, PG&E released a January email exchange featuring Brian\r\nCherry, PG&E’s vice president for regulatory relations, asking\r\nrepeatedly for Peevey’s chief of staff, Carol A. Brown, to change\r\nthe administrative law judge who was assigned to hear an unrelated\r\nrate case involving PG&E.\r\n<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n

\r\nAmusingly, \r\nBrian Cherry’s page<\/a> in \r\nPG&E’s “Our Team”<\/a> now gets “404 not found”.\r\nHis LinkedIn profile<\/a> still lists\r\nhim as “Vice President – Rates and Regulation at Pacific Gas and Electric Company\r\nSan Francisco Bay Area”.\r\nThe AP story says he and “two other senior officials ended their employment with the utility as a result of the emails released Monday.”\r\n

\r\nThe story says CPUC fired Carol A. Brown, and indeed she no longer\r\nseems to be listed there.\r\nHowever, I found this gem:\r\n\r\nA Best Practices Leadership Forum for Small Utilities<\/a>,\r\nby Carol A. Brown, Chief of Staff to President Michael R. Peevey, April 2013:\r\n

\r\n\r\n\"600x450<\/a>\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\nIt doesn’t just say she worked for CPUC President Peevy;\r\nit’s entirely about President Peevy and his Legacy, including this slide:\r\n

\r\n\r\n\"600x450<\/a>\r\n

\r\nSo President Peevy’s Legacy includes\r\n

\r\n