TURN, the residential ratepayer intervenor group, submitted a comment letter to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in Pacific Gas and Electric’s (PG&E) bankruptcy investigation proceeding (I.19-09-016). TURN has some harsh statements asking for denial of recovery of some large expenses, including wildfire victim payments and legal fees. One particular passage caught my attention:
The stark truth is that PG&E is a recidivist felon that has caused multiple
major catastrophes within the space of a decade.
I looked up the definition on Wikipedia. (There are other definitions that differ some.)
Recidivism is the act of a person repeating an undesirable behavior after they have either experienced negative consequences of that behavior, or have been trained to extinguish that behavior. It is also used to refer to the percentage of former prisoners who are rearrested for a similar offense.
But does “recidivist” apply in this situation for this reason: Has PG&E really suffered negative consequences from its previous behavior? So far, despite being convicted of felonies twice in the last decade, PG&E has been fined a total of $6.5 million for the San Bruno gas line explosion and the Camp Fire, which is equal to just over 4 hours of revenues for PG&E, and no one has gone to prison. PG&E continues to hold its franchise with few restrictions over most of northern California, and it appears headed for exiting bankruptcy by June 30 with a favorable finance plan in which current shareholders still hold most of the equity. It’s also not obvious how PG&E has been “trained” to extinguish its behavior, although the CPUC has instituted more oversight.
So, it’s not clear where and how PG&E has suffered significant negative consequences for its criminal acts, unless you consider “flea bites” as real punishment. To the contrary, PG&E has turned each of these events into money making enterprises. The first was by catching up on its deferred natural gas pipeline maintenance that it should have been spending on for decades. Instead, the CPUC could have simply ordered that the deferred spending be taken from past revenues. The second is the added investment of billions in hardening the rural distribution system and setting up back up generation in danger areas. That will add hundreds of millions or even a couple billion to annual revenues, all delivering a 10%+ return to company shareholders. Instead of negative consequences, PG&E has been able to turn these convictions into positive financial gains for its investors.
PG&E formally entered its guilty pleas on the Camp Fire in Butte County court. I was struck by the fact that the wrong person was standing to take responsibility for these corporate guilty pleas. CEO Bill Johnson was neither at PG&E before and when the fires occurred, and we won’t be there after June 30 when the consequences of the conviction occur.
I suggest reading the Chronicle article as it has moving descriptions of how many of the victims were found.
Pingback: PG&E’s bankruptcy—what’s happened and what’s next? | Economics Outside the Cube