Wildfire Events and Utility Responses in

Joseph Merrill, Emergency Response Staff July 24, 2020 Overview

I. Presentation: Events and Utility Responses in California • Major in 2007 and 2017-2019 • Electricity System Causes and Utility Responses • Public Safety Power Shutoffs

II. Reference Slides: California’s Transmission Planning Process • California Independent System Operator • California Public Utilities Commission • California Energy Commission

2 Extreme Wind-Driven Fire

“In October 2007, swept across Southern California and caused dozens of wildfires. The conflagration burned 780 square miles, killed 17 people, and destroyed thousands of homes and buildings. Hundreds of thousands of people were evacuated at the height of the fires. Transportation was disrupted over a large area for several days, including many road closures. Portions of the electric power network, public communication systems, and community water sources were destroyed.”

California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Decision 12-04-024 April 19, 2012

3 2007: Rice and Guejito/Witch Fires

Destructive Fires occur in San Diego County

Rice Fire (9,472 acres) • Caused by SDG&E lines not adequately distanced from vegetation • One of the most destructive CA fires of 2007, destroying 248 structures

Guejito and Witch Fires (197,990 acres) • Caused by dead tree limb falling on SDG&E infrastructure and delay in de-energizing power line • Most destructive CA fire of 2007, killing 2 people and destroying 1141 homes

4 5 6 SDG&E Response Sets the Stage

At the direction of CPUC, SDG&E initiated a collaborative process to develop a comprehensive fire-prevention program • Advanced meteorology capability • Undergrounded and moved transmission lines • First IOU Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) process • Refinement of PSPS protocols, advanced noticing to customers • Invested $1.5 billion over a decade to harden and upgrade system components, including sectionalizing to allow more targeted PSPS • Regarded as a success story and a model for the other IOUs

7 2017 Fires in Northern California

The October 2017 Fire Siege event in Napa, Sonoma and Lake Counties killed 44 people, burned 245,000 acres and destroyed 8,920 structures

• Two days of record-breaking winds • 172 wildfires, including 21 major incidents • in Sonoma and Napa counties killed 22 people, burned 36,806 acres and destroyed 317 structures • Wind-damaged power lines ignited several Fire Siege incidents

8 194 10 2017 Fires in Southern California

The December 2017 Santa Ana Fire Siege involved six major fires across the Southern California region, burning 308,380 acres and destroying over 1,375 structures.

• in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties spread initially at an acre per second, burned 281,893 acres and destroyed 1,063 structures • Caused by powerlines during high winds • Rain inundated the Santa Ana Fire Siege burn area • Diminished capacity of the soils to absorb the water contributed to flooding and mudslides that caused to several fatalities • The worst fires California had experienced during it’s recorded history

11 12 13 Responses to the Extreme Fire Conditions of 2017

In response to the extreme fire hazard conditions of 2017, SDG&E initiated PSPS affecting approximately 15,000 customers in 2017.

SCE also initiated PSPS affecting approximately 8,000 customers in the community of Idyllwild.

SCE notified city, county and government officials in advance but was unable to notify customers prior to the shutoff.

PG&E reported they had no PSPS policy in place for proactive shutoffs and did not initiate a PSPS during the 2017 fire season.

14 Responses to 2017 Wildfires

In March 2018, PG&E announced that it would begin proactively initiating pre-emptive shutoffs during extreme fire conditions to protect public safety.

In July 2018, CPUC Resolution ESRB-8 strengthened and extended to all IOUS the existing PSPS requirements applicable to SDG&E.

CPUC Decision 12-04-024 (2012) and Resolution ESRB-8 (2018) directed the IOUs to maintain and follow PSPS policies and provided protocols and procedures governing the IOUs’ use of PSPS.

15 2018, Almost Unimaginable

By November, California had already experienced the largest and most destructive fires in its history. The in Lake County, the largest fire in California’s history, killed one person and burned 459,123 acres in one event. The in Shasta County wrapped the entire shoreline of Whiskeytown Lake, formed a tornado of fire that encroached into Redding, and killed three people. Many other significant and destructive fires occurred in communities throughout the state during the 2018 fire season. For a few months Carr Fire would hold the distinction of most destructive fire in California’s history.

16 17 18 19 20 11-8-2018, The Worst Day

On November 8, 2018, the in Butte County was a lethal coda to an historically bad season.

Ignited by malfunctioning PG&E transmission equipment, the Camp Fire virtually destroyed the city of Paradise in a day and killed 85 people.

Camp Fire is the deadliest, most destructive wildfire in California’s history.

On the same day, the in Ventura and Counties was ignited by SCE utility equipment, destroyed 1,643 structures and killed three people.

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2019 Fires, A Calmer Season

Kincade Fire • Sonoma County, Oct. 23 - Nov. 6 • 77,758 acres, ignited by PG&E equipment • lasted several weeks and caused evacuations during a PSPS event Saddle Ridge Fire • Los Angeles County, Oct. 11 - 31 • 8,799 acres, started beneath SCE transmission but cause is unknown • lasted several weeks and caused evacuations during a PSPS event Several other major fires occurred, including: • , , , , , others

28 29 30 31 32 2019, Less Fire, More PSPS

PG&E • 1,942,549 customer shutoffs during October and November • 35 Counties affected during one event, Oct. 9-12 • 15 days in October and November SCE • 183,259 customer shutoffs during October and November • 10 Counties affected during one event, Oct. 27 – Nov. 4 • 43 days in October and November SDG&E • 28,098 customer shutoffs during October and November • San Diego County affected • 15 days in October

33 2019 PSPS Improvements Needed

CPUC found serious problems with overall implementation of PSPS: • unacceptable and dangerous interruption of communication infrastructure • ineffective communication with public safety partners • inadequate consideration of people and communities with access and functional needs • no comprehensive consideration of the public safety risk of the PSPS • additional findings for PG&E and SCE (and even SDG&E)

Source: CPUC Public Report on the Late 2019 PSPS Events, April 30, 2020 See Page 4 of the CPUC Report for summary of issues 34 Transmission Planning Process

To address wildfire in the 2020-2021 TPP, California ISO intends to identify: • Critical facilities in each local area for potential to reduce fire risk • Active CAISO approved projects that could reduce risk of fire impact • Opportunities to expedite active projects that could alleviate identified issues • Opportunities for minor scope change of active projects that could alleviate identified issues • Potential new upgrades that could help reduce risk of fire impact

35 Thank you!

Questions?

California Energy Commission Joseph Merrill, Emergency Response Staff

[email protected]

916-651-9005 (out of the office due to COVID-19)

1516 Ninth Street, MS-20 Sacramento, CA 95814-5512

36 Reference Slides

Following are slides provided for reference summarizing the California Independent System Operator’s (ISO) Transmission Planning Process (TPP), including discussion of California ISO’s plans for including wildfire considerations in the 2020- 2021 TPP cycle.

37 Transmission Planning Process

California ISO is responsible for the TPP: • Conducts an open, analytical process, including opportunities for stakeholder input. • Identifies potential system limitations and opportunities to reinforce the system. • Ensures reliability and seeks to improve efficiency. • Produces the California ISO Transmission Plan, which identifies and summarizes the issues and projects studied during the TPP. • Approves and denies project proposals.

38 Transmission Planning Process

California ISO relies on key inputs from the sister energy agencies to conduct the TPP:

• CEC prepares the Energy Demand Forecast • CPUC provides renewable resource portfolios developed and informed by CPUC’s Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) process • California ISO utilizes the RESOLVE model outputs from IRP • The California ISO works collaboratively with CPUC and CEC to align TPP study assumptions with the CPUC IRP

39 Transmission Planning Process

CPUC IRP Process in practice, a summary: • To conclude the very first implementation of the IRP process, the CPUC issued a decision on May 1, 2019 adopting a preferred system portfolio. • Preferred system portfolio was designed to ensure the electric sector achieves its statewide 2030 greenhouse gas reduction target established through SB 350. • Preferred system portfolio aims to meet the target at least cost while maintaining electric service reliability and meeting other State goals, while also meeting the RPS goals established in the more recent SB 100. • The IRP and corresponding findings of the TPP serve to inform the subsequent and related CPUC resource procurement proceeding.

40 Transmission Planning Process

CPUC IRP Process creates Renewable Portfolios (i.e. preferred system portfolios) for use in the TPP:

Source: 2019-2020 California ISO Transmission Plan 41 Transmission Planning Process

Stakeholders pressed the California ISO for inclusion of wildfire mitigation and PSPS studies in the current 2020-2021 TPP during a February 2020 meeting on the Draft Study Plan

• Bay Area Municipal Transmission group (BAMx) highlighted urgent need for a comprehensive wildfire impacts analysis • BAMx urged the California ISO to conduct planning studies on transmission- related PSPS events in advance of the 2020 fire season • And further, to include PSPS planning studies in its 2020-2021 transmission planning cycle to harness the well-established process for stakeholder engagement, review and feedback

42 Transmission Planning Process

Wildfire focused studies? • No wildfire focused studies were included in the 2020-2021Draft Study Plan • California ISO committed to analyzing wildfire risks in the course of the 2020-2021 TPP reliability assessment • California ISO will also coordinate with PTOs on existing infrastructure hardening plans

43 Transmission Planning Process

To address wildfire in the 2020-2021 TPP, California ISO intends to identify: • Critical facilities in each local area for potential to reduce fire risk • Active CAISO approved projects that could reduce risk of fire impact • Opportunities to expedite active projects that could alleviate identified issues • Opportunities for minor scope change of active projects that could alleviate identified issues • Potential new upgrades that could help reduce risk of fire impact

44 Transmission Planning Process

Stakeholders support inclusion of wildfire mitigation and PSPS studies in the current 2020-21 TPP: • CPUC expressed concern that wildfire mitigation studies are not a committed feature of future TPP cycles. • CPUC Public Advocates Office urged a review of CPUC approved utility wildfire mitigation plans to avoid duplication of projects. • PG&E “looks forward to coordinating with the CAISO on transmission system hardening and welcomes the opportunity to support CAISO’s identification of approved and potentially new projects that mitigate wildfire risk.”

45