(calm music)
Operator: Welcome to the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board.
This is the board meeting
on this day, Wednesday, May 12th, 2021.
Miss Edwards, you may begin.
-: Thank you very much.
I'd like to introduce our advisor, Katherine.
-: Thank you.
Welcome to the virtual public meeting
of the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board.
It's May 12th, 2021.
We are going to spend the next few minutes going
over the technology to be used during this meeting
so that we can all start today's meeting understanding
the technology.
A summary of the interaction methods can be found
on today's agenda, which can also be found
on the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board's website
cpuc.ca.gov/wsab.
This meeting is also being live broadcast
at the normal CPUC live broadcast location
adminmonitor.com/ca/cpuc.
To interact with the board during this meeting,
we have a phone number
and an operator on standby to cue the line.
The call-in number is listed on the meeting agenda
which can be found
on the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board website
and the main CPUC website.
The phone number is 1-800-857-1917.
And the passcode is one seven six seven five seven six.
I'm sorry about that.
It's one seven six seven five six seven.
When you join the call, you will be in listen only mode.
If you'd like to participate
during the public comment period, please press star one
on the phone and you'll be added to the public comment queue
and called upon during the meeting
by the chair with the assistance of the operator.
The public comments portion
of the meeting is at the beginning of the meeting.
Public comment will also be received
in the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board email inbox.
The email address is
wildfiresafetyadvisoryboard@cpuc.ca.gov.
Comments received here will be read
into the record if they can be read in under three minutes.
All comments received will be posted
on the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board website
after the meeting.
In addition the CPUC Public Advisor is on standby
if you're having additional technical problems.
Please do not hesitate to reach out
to the public advisor either by email or phone.
And that email address is public.advisers@cpuc.ca.gov.
The phone number is 866-849-8390.
Back to you Chair Edwards.
-: Thank you, Katherine.
And for those of you who are just signing
in it is in fact May 12th.
It's the third meeting
of the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board of 2021.
My name is Marcie Edwards.
I'm the current chair, and I'd like to thank all
of the board members for attending today.
Vice Chair Fellman is traveling and could not be with us.
I'd like to turn the meeting over to Aliyah Harrow
and she will lead us in the pledge of allegiance.
-: Thank you, Chair Edwards.
I pledge allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America and
to the Republic for which it stands one nation
under God with liberty and justice for all.
And now I turn the meeting
over to Katherine Stockton for our safety moment.
-: Thank you, Leah.
-: Okay, Katherine.
-: I was on mute.
-: Sorry about that.
-: No problem.
-: As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, most
of us face more stress than ever before.
It seems like, you know, we may be coming
out of this in the near future,
but we still need to be cautious.
Recognizing these challenges,
please take a couple of minutes to breathe
and let go of any stress that you may feel in this moment.
Thank you.
Leah?
-: Thank you, Katherine.
We are doing our best to make this virtual meeting
as accessible as possible.
And all the information about this meeting can be found
on the wildfire safety advisory boards website
at cpuc.ca.gov/wsab.
Links to all the documents
that we will be discussing today can be found there.
And these documents include the minutes
from the April 14th meeting, today's agenda
and today's PowerPoint presentation that is running
during the meeting.
We'll now turn the meeting back over to Chair Edwards.
-: Chair Edwards, I believe you're muted.
Chair Edwards, you're muted.
-: Chair Edwards, I think you're muted.
-: Wow, okay.
Now that I am un-muted today's meeting agenda.
We're gonna begin with public comment.
After public comment, we'll discuss and vote on the minutes
from the April 14th meeting.
Following that we'll have a presentation
from the Wildfire Safety Division on their activities.
After these presentation we'll take a quick stretch break.
After the stretch break, the board will present its draft
recommendations on the 2021 wildfire mitigation plan updates
for small and multi jurisdictional utilities.
We'll have an opportunity for some discussion.
Following that we'll have a vote on the recommendation.
And then we will move to adjournment.
We're going to open up telephone lines,
move into our first opportunity for public comment.
If you'd like to participate,
as we've said, the phone is 1-800-857-1917.
The pass code one seven six seven five six seven.
Please press star one on your phone to get in the queue.
Operator is the line open?
Operator: The public comment line is now open.
-: Thank you operator.
Quickly, let's check our Wildfire Safety Advisory Board
email box.
Katherine, do you have any email communication?
-: We do not have any email communication now
but the public is welcome to send emails
and they'll be published on the website
and distributed to the board.
-: Excellent, thank you very much.
Operators, do we have any public comment on the phone line?
Operator: I'm showing no callers on the phone line
at this time in the queue.
-: Okay, I'm gonna to wait just a moment
because public comment is the backbone of any public group
or organization and it's very critical
for us when we give an opportunity
for anyone that would like to participate.
So I'm gonna give it another few seconds
and then I'll check again with the operator.
Operator, do we have anybody else on the line?
Operator: I'm showing no callers
in the queue at this time.
-: All right, thank you and this closest public comment.
We're going to move to the next topic.
The April 14th board meeting minutes
The minutes can be found
on the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board website.
I know everyone's had an opportunity
to read the minutes prior to the meeting.
Are there any edits or additions to the meeting minutes?
Hearing none, I entertain a vote
to adopt the meeting minutes.
-: So moved.
-: Thank you, Chris Porter.
Do we have a second?
Thank you, John Mader.
I'm advised by legal that they want a roll call
vote on a motion to adopt the minutes.
Chair Edwards, yes.
Vice Chair Fellman is absent.
-: Board member Porter? -: Aye.
-: Board members Syphard? -: Aye.
-: Board member Mader? -: Aye.
-: Board member Armstrong? -: Aye.
-: Board member Block. -: Aye.
-: Thank you.
Okay, moving to a presentation
from the Wildfire Safety Division
and we welcome the acting program manager
for that division, Lucy Morgan.
Lucy will provide us an update
on the WSDs evaluation of the WMP,
safety culture assessment,
safety certification guidelines, and the WSDs transmission
to the office of energy infrastructure safety
energy safety, that's within the natural resources division.
And Lucy, thank you so much for joining us today.
-: Not at all, can you hear me okay?
-: I can, yes.
-: Brilliant.
Okay with that I'll kick off then.
So, yes, as you mentioned,
I want to provide updates on four items.
The wildfire mitigation plans
and the progress that the WSD is making on those.
And an update on the safety culture assessments
and updates on the safety certification guidelines
and then updates on our transition to energy.
So firstly taking the wildfire mitigation plans.
You just move on to the next slide.
Thank you.
So, the key update when it comes
to the wildfire mitigation plans is on the revision notices.
So I'm not sure if you're aware,
Wildfire Safety Advisory Board,
we, the WSD, published three revision notices on May 4th.
Those revision notices were respective PG&E, SCE
and Bear Valley WMP 2021 updates.
These revision notices identify critical issues
that the utility must address in 30 days.
So these utilities must issue a revision notice response
by the 3rd of June.
And stakeholders have seven days to comment
on these revision notice responses.
And following that that
there's a six day submit reply comments.
So in terms of the revision notices themselves
the WSD identified six ethical issues associated with PG&E.
WMP updates and the scope
of issues included de-energization
of PSPS quantitative targets.
The station of the significant changes
of high priority circuit segments.
Aggregation of risks spend deficiencies,
the system hardening initiatives.
We've sought clarification of the processes
of quality assurance and quality control in terms
of their distribution and transmission asset inspections
and we've identified a number
of issues with (indistinct) and record keeping.
For Edison we identified four critical issues and the scope
of those included the reported risks spend efficiency values
for mitigation initiative,
the analysis of alternative mitigation initiative,
justification of extensive use of public conductors.
And we requested further detail on the PSPS
energization corrective action plan.
I'm still actually on the previous slide.
Sorry, if you could just look back, I'm almost done with it.
Brilliant, thanks.
And then the final revision notice was to Bear Valley
and the scope of issues were relating to them not complying
with the WMP guidelines to the definition and labeling
of the initiative and the aggregation of expenditure data.
So within each of these revision notices
the WSP has identified specific remedies
to address these critical issues.
And we're very much looking forward
to the revision notice responses being submitted
by the 3rd of June.
So just moving on to the next slide, thank you.
-: Lucy, before you do move on
could you very briefly remind any members
of the public who might play this video subsequently
the criticality to the investor owned utilities
of receiving a certification overall?
-: Of receiving an approved WMP you mean?
-: Correct.
-: Right, yes.
So is critical that the utilities receive an approved WMP
because that all feeds
into the safety certification process.
And I'm gonna be talking about that a bit later
but that enables an approved safety certification,
enables the utility to access the wildfire fund, so.
So moving on to the SMJU/ITO updates.
And I've listed just on the left-hand side
the electrical corporations that are part of that.
That's Bear Valley, Liberty PacificCorp, Horizon West
and TransBay Cable.
So just a refresher.
The SMJU/ITO submitted their WMP on March 3rd.
We received opening comments in April.
We've received the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board comments
on these WMPs and we very much appreciate your insight
and wanted to thank you for taking the time
and the consideration that went into developing these.
So thank you for that.
I want to also set out some next steps.
So we're gonna be confirming whether the remaining SMJU/ITOs
have revision notices by May 24th.
So the revision notice for Bear Valley has already gone out
and it'll be confirming
whether the remaining SMJU/ITOs have revision notices.
And then following that
we expect to publish draft determinations
on the WMP updates in June for any WMPs that don't have a
revision notice attached to them
and August for those that do.
Moving on to the next slide.
Thank you.
So I also wanted to provide an update
on the annual safety culture assessments.
I included a brief update
on this within the last WSAB meeting in April.
So I just want this slide to refresher
on this particular piece of work.
So back in April, we conducted the kickoff meetings
with the electrical corporation
and then this month we've been focusing on launching
and administering the workforce surveys
to establish the safety culture baseline.
And we've also been refining the interview protocols
and template.
Next month, we'll be analyzing the data
from the workforce surveys
and conducting targeted employee interviews.
And then in July
we'll be finalizing the safety culture assessments.
And then, moving on to the safety certification guidance.
So this is what I was referring to earlier.
So yesterday we published the proposed guidance
from WSD on the safety certification process for 2021.
We're seating opening comments
on the safety certification letter
by June 1st and reply comments on June 15.
So we very much welcome any recommendations that come
from the WSAB on these proposals.
We're more than happy to set
up a meeting if you'd like to discuss them further.
The purpose of this letter was
to seek public comment on two key aspects.
Firstly, on the timeline change.
So the WSD is proposing that we synchronize the June dates
for safety certification requests so
that the electrical corporations would submit their request
for safety certification at exactly the same time each year.
We're proposing that that's in September
with a decision date for WSD being in December.
Then you would have, you know,
if the safety certification requests were approved
you'd have them aligning pretty much with the calendar year.
And then the second item we are seeking
public comment on is the guidance.
So there's a number of criteria established
in public utilities code 8389.
And one of those includes having an approved WMP
which then leads to achieving
or be compared to the safety certification.
And so what we're doing is seeking guidance
through this public process for the WSD to use when
evaluating an electrical corporation safety
certification submission against these criteria established
in public utilities code 8389.
So just moving on
to the final item I wanted to talk about today
which was an update on the WSD transition to energy safety.
So just moving. -: Next slide please.
-: Why thank you.
Yeah, and just one more.
Thanks very much.
So the WSD is still on track to transition
to energy safety by July 1st, 2021.
We've been working hard finalizing the rules of practice
and procedure for the office of administrative law review.
We've been migrating data and equipment,
preparing them to move, the physical move,
to the new natural facilities agency building
in Sacramento at the end of July
and developing and implementing staff training.
In terms of communication, we've been providing information
to key stakeholders throughout May and June,
Well throughout May and we will be doing so throughout June.
And we'll be continuing to regularly communicate
with the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board in the run
up to July 1st to support all transition activities.
That's the end of my update.
So thank you very much.
Any questions?
-: Do we have any comments or questions from board members?
-: Thank you, Lucy. -: Can you offer
any specificity?
Excuse me, I'm sorry Chair Edwards.
-: Certainly John, go ahead.
-: I was wondering if you had any specificity regarding the
critical remedies that you were seeking remedies
for critical issues that you were seeking?
I think six for PG&E, four for Southern California Edison
and then two for BVES.
-: Yeah, so within, I'm not sure if you've seen the revision
notices that were published last week, but for each
of the critical issues identified, there's a corresponding
remedy identified by the WSD.
So we've been very specific about what we're looking for
and how the utility can resolve those critical issues.
Does that answer your question?
-: Sorry, I muted myself to make sure I didn't make noise.
Yeah, I mean, I can look those up.
I just wondered if you had any right now.
-: I do have.
It would take me quite long time
to run you through them though 'cause there's quite a few.
I'm happy to do it.
-: Well, no, I think that's all right.
I'll review them later.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Lucy.
Thank you, Mr. Mader.
Do we have any other comments from board members?
Thank you, Lucy, very much.
We appreciate you taking the time to be here.
-: My pleasure.
All right.
We've been in session 20 minutes.
My personal opinion is
that we don't need a stretch break this quickly.
If any of the board members disagree, please raise your hand
and I'll transition into a stretch break.
Seeing no hands I'm going to continue with the agenda.
We're gonna discuss the board's draft recommendations
to the 2021 wildfire mitigation plan updates
for small and multi-jurisdictional utilities.
Staff will read summaries of the recommendations
to be followed by any necessary board discussion
and following that a vote.
And of course the draft recommendations can be found
on the board's website at cpuc.ca.gov/wsab.
Katherine?
-: Thank you.
Next slide please, great.
So the first section of the recommendations is
about risk assessment and resource allocation.
And the board recommends, in terms of,
for risk modeling assumptions and methodology,
the board requests
further details about modeling methods, assumptions
and how the outputs of models are used in decision-making.
The board also requests more detail about how their risk,
about how the risk scoring and methodology is completed.
And I would also preface, I don't know
if you said something in the beginning Marcie,
but I'd also preface this discussion
with a lot of these recommendations are very similar
and mirror the recommendations
for the investor owned utilities.
This recommendation is a little bit, is new.
And it's a little bit more specific
regarding standardized risk models.
The board recommends creating an open source
and standardized risk model that all IOUs
and SMJUs can utilize.
The board also requests more transparent modeling methods.
Next slide please.
-: So in this evaluation, the board recommends
that the WSD request more detail
about how the SMJUs use machine learning,
explain how they quantify uncertainties
and how the machines recognize patterns.
The board, very similar to the IOU recommendations,
the board requests the creation
of a formalized scientific review process
and a common data platform.
The board also requests the IOUs
and the SMJUs provide detailed descriptions
of the background experience and qualifications
of consultants or staff completing risk modeling
and risk mapping work.
As well as require that the SMJUs hire
or contract with ecologists or fire scientists.
Next slide.
-: Thank you.
So the next section
of the paper is about vegetation management.
The first recommendation is
about using LIDAR for vegetation clearances.
The board would like to clarify that LIDAR inspections
or the board recommends that that WSD clarify
that LIDAR inspections shall not replace visual inspections
and annual LIDAR inspections shall be used
in addition to visual inspections.
The board recommends the WSD require SMJUs
to follow the POUs and IOUs best practice
for the visual inspections and the schedules of inspections.
Second, the board has a recommendation
about tree growth regulators and herbicides.
The board requests further details from the SMJUs
about the use of tree growth regulators and herbicides.
Finally, the board recommends more information
about qualifications of workers performing the mitigation.
The board recommends requiring in-house staff
with minimum qualifications
in vegetation management and ecological sciences
instead of relying solely on contractors.
Next slide.
-: The next section
in the recommendations is system design and grid hardening.
And the board recommends that the WSD required an increase
to more detailed invasive inspections,
as well as require the SMJUs to follow POUs
and IOUs best practices
for visual and detailed inspections.
The WSD should require the SMJUs
to employ the most up-to-date technology such
as infrared to adequately examine the infrastructure
within the high fire threat district.
The board also recommends
that the WSD requests more information
about prioritizing mitigation efforts,
the rate of project completion,
the methodology used to determine effectiveness,
the effectiveness of hardening efforts
and any barriers to infrastructure replacement.
Next slide
-: Thank you.
And continuing in the system design
and grid hardening section, the board has a recommendation
about workforce training and qualified personnel.
The board recommends the WSD requests explanation
of how personnel are deployed.
The personnel constraints as well as how contract inspectors
are chosen and their actual roles concerning
the mitigation work.
The SMJUs should consider developing a larger
internal workforce to manage these inspections
and the mitigation work.
This, the second recommendation is about advance or the,
I guess maybe it's the fifth. (chuckles)
The next recommendation is about advanced fault protection.
So the board requests an explanation
of how the fault interrupting equipment is checked
and verified.
The board requests information
about how the SMJUs use infrared inspections
and whether lightning arrestors
in the high fire threat districts have been changed
to the CAL FIRE approved arrestors.
Finally regarding de-energization of idle lines.
The board recommends requiring an evaluation
of the feasibility of de-energizing the idle lines.
Next slide
-: But in the emergency planning and communication section
the board recommends that the WSD request more information
about customer feedback about the SMJUs communication
and outreach efforts and assess
whether the SMJUs are using the appropriate metrics.
The board also recommends that the WSD requests an expansion
or refinement of outreach to the AFN community
and vulnerable customers.
And the SMJUs should continue improving their communication
and outreach.
I now turn the meeting over to chair Edwards.
-: You're on mute Chair Edwards.
-: There should be like an automatic button or something.
As many know the, we broke
into Bagley-Keene or BK groups to do this work.
So to the extent that you have questions or comments
please reference the section
so we can put the correct slide up.
And I would ask any member
of that particular BK group to then answer the question.
I will let the board know
I know that all of you have done significant work
on this in advance, so that is very much appreciated.
And to the extent that any additional questions
or discussions remain, I wanna open it up to the board.
Just raise your hand if you'd like to be recognized.
Oh come on, John, you must have a question.
(laughing)
-: I think Chair Edwards,
I think the points were made during the presentation
that these recommendations are largely
in line with our recommendations for the IOUs.
And I, you know, we don't get to talk
about these things together with each other
because we're in the Bagley-Keene groups.
And so this is an opportunity to talk
about in the risk assessment in particular
that really what we're probably be working
on at the next meeting, which is
after reviewing all of the IOUs and the POUs
and the smaller IOUs that, you know,
we're finding the need to standardize,
at least standardize the reporting
of the risk models that are being used.
And so that, and that there be more details
about exactly what are in these risk models.
You know, we're seeing that's a lot
of different entities in California, and they're all coming
up with all the different risk models.
I do have to say that Liberty really did actually put
out probably the most information on the risk model
that they were using, that we've seen to date
about specific information, but still, you know, we
didn't actually see exactly what the factors that go
into this risk model, what the data look like,
what happens when there isn't data,
what is weighted, which way.
And we do want to see these WMPs get
to the point where that they're that transparent
or there's attachments where they go
into that detail in their report somewhere.
-: Thank you, John.
Your comments are certainly appropriate.
Anybody else have any comments or questions?
Yes, ma'am go ahead.
-: All right, so you hear me okay?
-: Yes.
-: Great, so to follow up on board member Mader's comments.
I would like to just bring to everyone's attention
the concept of fair data principles.
And they're written up on a page, a website, go-fair.org.
And the concept is to make data find-able, accessible,
interoperable and reusable as the website says
because humans are increasingly relying
on computational support to deal with data
as a result of the increase in volume, complexity
and creation speed of the data.
We are relying more and more on these analytic methods
to understand what these data are giving us.
So the concept behind the fair principles is to make sure
that we can also validate as humans, the value of the data
and being able to reproduce the data,
to validate what the results are giving us
in multiple disciplines.
So that's a foundation behind much
of the concepts that we're recommending here
for the small utilities, as well as the large IOUs.
And that's the end of my comment today.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Ms. Block.
It's, actually, it's fascinating to me
because many of us were prior to the era, when you called
up a search engine and you got 183,000 responses.
So that ability to parse data into usual segments
and to be able to draw conclusions of it,
juxtaposed against a competitive model
which certainly the investor owns
and others are is work that still needs to be done.
So I think your comments are certainly appreciated.
-: And actually just, just to conclude on that too.
I've said this before, but very happy to keep saying it.
There's been so much, you know
we're the California Wildfire Safety Advisory Board
and we're the hub of all
of this advanced machine learning research
in private industry.
And all of that has yet to be regulated in part,
because it's not,
most of it has nothing to do with saving lives.
And so this
these fair principles will help us to understand methods
and be more transparent about the process
because now we're using it for really critical decisions.
So yeah, that's why that's,
there's an importance here that's been different
than traditionally thought of.
-: Thank you, that's an excellent point.
Board member Porter, did you have some comments?
My chat function's acting up a little bit here.
-: Actually, I didn't, but since you've called on me
I actually do have something.
With the, a common theme with the small
and multi-jurisdictional utilities is that they're
in deeply rural areas and they
most of their customers are resorts.
Some are mobile home parks that have second
and third tier not seen by those utilities as stakeholders.
But the customers behind those meters
and trying to understand exactly what their outreach
programs do for those individuals is something that we
need to understand better.
They need to be a little bit more detailed in that
and the methodology that they're using to reach those
and the work that they are doing in public outreach.
What metrics are they using to let us understand
that it's actually working.
That's something that didn't come through clear enough.
They are doing well at trying to do what they can
with the vast service territories that they have.
But again, same thing with John Mader,
we need more crumbs to follow
to get a clearer picture.
-: How are they quantifying success?
-: Yes, exactly.
-: And how do they know that's success?
Yes. -: Yes.
-: Now, I certainly see your point.
Anything else, sir?
-: No.
-: Do any of the other board members have any comments
either general or specific?
-: I can make a comment.
-: Okay, go ahead.
-: So I was doing a bit of reflecting
before the meeting and a couple of quotes came to mind
and I thought of them as these are somewhat big picture
quotes describing the motivation for a lot
of the recommendations that we're making.
So the first one
and they're both basically saying the same thing.
The first one is
"It is highly probable that from the very beginning,
"apart from death, the only ironclad rule
"of human experience has been the law
"of unintended consequences."
The other one is something that my dear colleague,
John Keely, who was on that vegetation management group
often says and it's based on something
that Eric Sevareid said.
Eric Sevareid being a very well known journalist
and war correspondent.
And his quote is "The chief cause of problems is pollution."
(laughing)
So I bring this up this because, you know,
we are making a lot of recommendations
and many of them are the same for, you know,
whether it's the IOUs or the smaller organizations.
And in terms of the two topics that I've worked on
which are risk assessment and modeling
and vegetation management.
In terms of risk modeling
there's a lot riding on these models.
These are the main methods that are being used
to determine how to take action
and to make priorities about the actions.
And these modeling platforms
are they're one, they're very complex.
Two they're dealing with dynamic systems
and three there are many different components that are
all being combined together.
So we are not trying to be critical in our recommendations.
We are simply trying to understand more.
The requests for transparency, professional review,
knowing what the qualifications are, is basically suggesting
that there are just more eyes on the problem.
And with more eyes on the problem,
the greater the chance that these actions are going
to be effective and the lower the chance there is
for unintended consequences.
And the more experience that the eyes have on them
it makes it even more likely
that the actions can be effective.
And then in terms of vegetation management
I thought about two examples
of what we're recommending that fall
into this law of unintended consequences idea.
The first one is we've been talking
about being careful in terms of removing potentially green
low growing shrubs that have higher fuel moisture content
to try to prevent the unintended consequence
of the invasion of very flashy weedy fields
that are quickly growing that are very flammable.
So that the vegetation management designed to
increase fire safety doesn't unintentionally
actually increase fire risks
by resulting in more fires because whatever sparks lands
on something that's highly ignitable.
And then the final one is the recent recommendation
that we made about trying to understand better
the tree growth regulators or the herbicides is
that they may be applied with the best intentions
but there is a lot we still don't understand
about these chemicals.
And one is we don't want to have a public health
consequence that is equal to
or rivals the public health consequence
of wildfires because these can get into our water system.
And then, you know
there's also the potential unintended consequence
that these chemicals can result
in clearing areas that then open them
up for establishment of flashy, flammable vegetation.
So that's, those were my thoughts that I wanted to add.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
Those were excellent observations.
Board member Armstrong?
I saw your hand up.
-: Yeah, thanks Chair Edwards.
You know, as we enter into the second full year
as a board, you know, I can't help that think
the total number of wildfire mitigation plans that we have.
I think we're all probably getting a little bit
of WMP fatigue.
But it's hard to compare as you
read through just getting done with the large IOUs
and then going through the small IOUs,
there's definitely a big difference
in information to digest.
And I think it goes to the request for more information
from the small IOUs.
And some of the things that I was involved
in were the vegetation management
and the system design and hardening.
And well, we don't, you know,
looking at things like the inspection processes
whether we add LIDAR to it, which LIDAR's a great tool but,
and we've seen multiple plans where
or had multiple discussions with places where they talk
about false positives or, you know, not reading correctly.
So you can't replace the eyes on,
people in the field basically inspecting some
of this stuff with just LIDAR.
I think LIDAR is an awesome tool.
It needs to continue, but the risk is just
too high to rely solely on that.
Now along with some of the old inspection processes
where it was a fall on a five-year cycle,
and we're talking about most of the small IOUs are
in tier two and tier three areas.
You know, it's critical that we see what's going on,
especially if after a winter storm, things like that,
just to make sure that everything is okay
before fire season starts.
So looking at some of the best practices
with some of the larger IOUs and even some of the
in many of the POUs, where they inspect
on a annual basis of those areas, I think is critical.
And, you know,
those are the models that need to be taken into.
And again, I don't wanna beat the dead horse with, you know,
what a lot of people are saying.
With a lot of this modeling, some of the larger IOUs, but
you know, we just, the asset inspections are critical.
Vegetation management is critical.
Get the right people to inspect, you know,
understand what you're inspecting.
I used to work for utility that, you know,
lineman cut trees.
And I noticed at one of these
that's exactly what was being done
versus somebody that is, you know, in tuned with, you know,
the species of the trees, that type of stuff.
And I, and it's critical in my opinion as well
that we get the right people doing the right inspections.
So just wanted to touch on that a little bit, Chair Edwards.
-: Thank you board member.
I think you're kind of the backstory
that perspective is extremely valuable for people who
certainly weren't able to be part of the more
detailed discussion.
Thank you for that.
All right.
I wanna do one more check.
I don't see anyone requesting to speak in chat.
I do not see any more hands raised,
albeit actually I'm having again a little trouble.
Yes.
-: Chair Edwards, I'd like to just make another,
just to support what board member Syphard was saying
about these laws of unintended consequences
and our requests for understanding of the models.
I just want to repeat what she said, just to hammer it home.
Those of us that have been reviewing these risk
assessments solutions are in no way criticizing the process.
And we were actually really thrilled to see the progress
that has been written into these plans.
So it's in no way a criticism.
It's just a matter of the transparency
and understanding the complexity.
And I just thought that was worthy of saying twice.
Thank you.
-: Thank you.
I now don't have any comments to make
because you guys have made all of mine.
Seeing no other requests, seeing or hearing none
I was again, advised that this would take a voice vote.
Vice chair Fellman is not in attendance.
Do I have a,
anybody wanna move that we accept the recommendations?
-: I'll do it.
-: Board member Armstrong moves.
Do I have a second?
-: Second.
-: We have a second.
And with that board member Syphard. -: Aye.
-: Board member Mader. -: Aye.
-: Board member Armstrong. -: Aye.
Board member Block. -: Aye.
-: And it's certainly an aye from myself as well.
All right, that motion passes.
And again, thank you all
for your very hard work on this particular topic.
Like to thank everyone for participating
in the virtual board meeting.
Our next board meeting will take place June 23rd, 2021
and we will discuss the board's recommendations
on the guidelines overall.
Again please don't hesitate to get ahold of us.
Contact information can be found
Wildfire Safety Advisory Board website www.cpuc.ca.gov/wsab.
We would also like to thank Governor Newsom
and the legislature for their continued efforts
in supporting wildfire mitigation.
With Governor Newsom's recent declaration of drought
in many counties and fire season quickly approaching,
we applaud his signing
of the $536 million wildfire package that will
fund projects that support wildfire suppression,
improve forest health and build resilience
in communities to protect residents
and property from catastrophic wildfire.
And as always, all of the board would like to
provide our special thanks to Robert Stanford
and Joe Haga and our team of IT professionals
at the PUC for making this meeting possible.
I wanna check with our analysts, Katherine Stockton
for any final thoughts
-: I'd like to take a few brief moments to talk
about vaccines and the COVID-19 crisis.
Please stay safe, everyone.
It feels like the vaccine is ending
but we still need to be vigilant and be cautious.
Your efforts will help all of Californians.
The most important thing that you can do is get vaccinated
for your own health, for the health of the community.
Vaccines will help everyone over the,
vaccines are now available for everyone over the age of 16.
Vaccines will help us get herd immunity.
And please talk to your doctor.
If you're having, if you're hesitant
about getting a vaccine.
The vaccines will help the most vulnerable
members of society.
And they'll really prevent you from,
if you do get sick with COVID,
they'll prevent very likely prevent you
from getting the worst symptoms of COVID
and likely prevent death.
Please visit www.myturn.ca.gov
for more information about vaccination sites.
Finally, once now that so many of us are vaccinated
please review the CDC guidance
on what to do once you are vaccinated.
You can gather indoors without mask
and staying six feet apart with fully vaccinated people.
You can, if you are vaccinated
you can gather indoors with unvaccinated people of any age
but just from one household, unless there are folks
in that household that are, could have an increased risk
for severe illness from COVID-19.
If you're fully vaccinated
you can gather for activities outdoors without masks,
except under certain situations
of crowded settings and venues.
So for all other situations,
you should still wear a mask.
For example, if you're around unvaccinated people
from many from different households.
So really take some time to review that.
And then finally follow public health guidance
regarding closures.
Things are starting to open back up again,
but not everything.
Please visit www.COVID19.ca.gov for that information.
Thank you.
-: Thank you, Katherine.
Once again, we appreciate the support of our advisors
and our IT professionals.
Certainly that of all of the board members
for not only your work on this topic
but also your discussion and comments.
I think they were all taken very well.
And also finally the public.
And again, I will remind you, we are always looking forward
to hearing your opinion.
With that, do I have a motion to adjourn this meeting?
-: Board member Porter so moves.
-: Thank you board member, do I have a second?
Mr. Mader.
Given that I'm just not hearing a huge round of objections,
we will go ahead and adjourn the meeting.
And again, I thank you.
I thank you all very much for your participation.
Operator: This concludes today's conference.
All participants may disconnect at this time.