BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    SB 1028


                                                                    Page  1





          SENATE THIRD READING


          SB  
          1028 (Hill)


          As Amended  August 18, 2016


          Majority vote


          SENATE VOTE:  39-0


           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Committee       |Votes|Ayes                   |Noes                 |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
          |Utilities       |15-0 |Gatto, Patterson,      |                     |
          |                |     |Burke, Chávez, Dahle,  |                     |
          |                |     |Eggman, Cristina       |                     |
          |                |     |Garcia, Eduardo        |                     |
          |                |     |Garcia, Hadley,        |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |                |     |Roger Hernández,       |                     |
          |                |     |Obernolte, Quirk,      |                     |
          |                |     |Santiago, Ting,        |                     |
          |                |     |Williams               |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |----------------+-----+-----------------------+---------------------|
          |Appropriations  |15-0 |Gonzalez, Bigelow,     |                     |
          |                |     |Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, |                     |
          |                |     |Chang, Eggman, Eduardo |                     |
          |                |     |Garcia, Jones,         |                     |








                                                                    SB 1028


                                                                    Page  2





          |                |     |Obernolte, Quirk,      |                     |
          |                |     |Santiago, Weber, Wood, |                     |
          |                |     |McCarty                |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
          |                |     |                       |                     |
           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 


          SUMMARY:  Requires electric utilities to construct, maintain and  
          operate their electric lines and equipment in a manner to  
          minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfire, and to prepare and  
          submit wildfire mitigation plans.  Specifically, this bill:


          1)Requires electrical corporations regulated by the California  
            Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to develop and submit  
            wildfire mitigation plans. 
          2)Requires the CPUC to review and comment on a wildfire  
            mitigation plan within 30 days, and conduct audits to ensure  
            electrical corporations are satisfactorily complying with  
            accepted plans.  


          3)Allows an electrical corporation to amend a wildfire  
            mitigation plan in response to CPUC comments within 30 days.


          4)Requires publicly-owned utilities to file wildfire mitigation  
            plans with their governing boards, at an interval to be  
            determined by the board.  Fire prevention plans prepared  
            pursuant to the Federal Power Act and approved by federal  
            government may be used to meet this requirement.


          FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee: 


          1)Increases costs of approximately $620,000 (Utilities  








                                                                    SB 1028


                                                                    Page  3





            Reimbursement Account) to the CPUC for staffing, training, and  
            equipment costs.  
          2)Increases contracting costs of approximately $250,000 annually  
            for three years for the CPUC to contract with a fire  
            mitigation consultant.


          3)Publicly-owned utility requirements will not result in  
            reimbursable state-mandates because the utilities have the  
            authority to charge fees and generate revenue to offset their  
            costs.


          COMMENTS: 


          1)Purpose:  Fire prevention efforts have traditionally focused  
            on measures to prevent utilities' equipment and infrastructure  
            from sparking fires.  This bill, modeled after a similar  
            effort in Victoria, Australia, is intended to provide a  
            different approach to fire prevention by requiring a utility  
            to prepare wildfire mitigation plans. 


          2)Background:  In October of 2007, a series of large wildfires  
            ignited and burned hundreds of thousands of acres in several  
            counties in Southern California.  The fires displaced nearly  
            one million residents, destroyed thousands of homes, and took  
            the lives of seventeen people.  The Witch Fire, one of the  
            nation's most damaging, was ignited by power lines.  


            More recently, the September 2015 Butte Fire burned more than  
            70,000 acres in Amador and Calaveras Counties, destroyed 818  
            structures, and caused two fatalities.  This fire may have  
            been caused by contact between an electric overhead line and a  
            tree.  










                                                                    SB 1028


                                                                    Page  4





            In 2008, the CPUC initiated a rulemaking proceeding to address  
            fires related to utility poles.  The CPUC's efforts have  
            resulted in additional requirements on utilities to reduce the  
            likelihood of fires started by or threatening utility  
            facilities, including improved vegetation management.   
            Utilities are now also required to develop electric utility  
            fire prevention plans.  




            The CPUC has also adopted rules to implement fire hazard maps  
            of high-risk areas in Southern California.  In May 2015, the  
            CPUC opened a new rulemaking proceeding to develop and adopt  
            fire-threat maps and fire-safety regulations (R. 15-05-006).


          Analysis Prepared by:                                             
                          Darion Johnston / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083  FN:  
          0004520