Skip to main content

Listen

Read

Watch

Schedules

Programs

Events

Give

Account

Donation Heart Ribbon

Special Project: America's Wall: Decades-Long Struggle To Secure US-Mexico Border

Visit the Midday Edition homepage

New Judge In San Onofre Case Has Past Experience With San Diego Utility Issues

February 8, 2016 1:10 p.m.

GUESTS:

Amita Sharma, KPBS Investigative Reporter

Related Story: New Judge In San Onofre Case Has Past Experience With San Diego Utility Issues

Transcript:

This is a rush transcript created by a contractor for KPBS to improve accessibility for the deaf and hard-of-hearing. Please refer to the media file as the formal record of this interview. Opinions expressed by guests during interviews reflect the guest’s individual views and do not necessarily represent those of KPBS staff, members or its sponsors.

I Cavanaugh is Monday, February 8, first in our headlines today a new state regulatory judge has been appointed to oversee the California Public Utilities Commission. Just very is replacing just Melanie Darley, but apparently consumer are not celebrating the apartment. KPBS the reporter Anita is here. Welcome here is good to be here. A settlement agreement reached what was left to do case.
Papers have been filed to sell $5 million settlement now, as you know, that settlement requires customers to pay for 70% of the bill which is $3.3 billion. The consumer is asking that settlement be avoided. He says is illegal because the framework of that settlement was reached in Poland three state regulators and Anderson and as an executive. He also argues that look, to be consumer justice sign off on the agreement had withdrawn their support and to Superior Court judges have signed search warrants saying that there is probable cause to believe that a felony was committed in the process of coming up with that agreement. Judge Mary Beth job is to preside over the hearing of that case. Now her ruling will carry some weight, on the final say, it will be public utilities commissioners who have the final thing.
Why is judges met with skepticism?
She presided over a case or US electric in that case wanted to make customers pay for uninsured wildfire costs arising from the 2000 wildfires. If you recall Marie, life started those fires. The company was also asking for a catastrophic insurance pool that will be funded by public body will be for future uninsured costs. But she initially ruled against, she called the request extraordinary and unprecedented but then, she allowed SDG&E to address a settlement talks with representatives and she did not allow any evidence establishing whether such a fund was even needed.
What kind of a message sensor equipment sent to the public
Is been a long criticism over the last year. Actually over the past several years but especially over the last year so basically one way of interpreting this is look, it isn't as usual at the, a statement public dropping or is handling the San Bruno gas explosion, back into the tent which killed eight people. The lack of investigation over why the radioactive leak occurred back in 2012, and now the natural gas leak at Alisa Canyon in LA County there are people who were saying that there was plenty of warning, that Julie could occur. It should be noted that there are state investigations ongoing weight San Bruno gas explosion in the league.
There's nothing move in the assembly of the Sacramento to perhaps change the very nature of the safety?
That arises from that those three events touched major portion of the state of California so there was a report that came out last year and it was done by a law firm, and it basically analyzed PC decisions concluded that major positions involving billions of dollars, tend to be reached behind closed doors and those divisions tend to favor the utilities and they don't favor the public good. So now there is an effort by the resentment might, too busy dismantle PUC, and assign its various responsibilities to different states agencies.
Advantages to going over and consumer advocates like
Is too soon to tell. There is some people as they look, this is an independent body, it is run correctly, is run according to what is mission is which is deserved the public good. It can be a force for good, and they really don't want to come under another state agency that there are other people who say that this is massive opportunities, if there is a partial effort, to transform our energy system, create public power, or decentralized transmission lines and create more rooftop solar, then yes, it should be dismantled.
I've been speaking with the previous investigator reported any thought. Is a lesser