Eric Risberg/2011 AP file photoPG&E shareholders will be on the hook for part of a rate increase after the company was fined Thursday over inappropriate emails between officials and regulators over the rate increase proposal.

PG&E fined over alleged secret dealings

State regulators Thursday fined Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and required its shareholders to cover as much as $400 million of a gas rate increase because of backroom negotiations between the utility and regulators.

The California Public Utilities Commission voted 3-0 in favor of the penalty, which stems from recently released emails that show a PG&E executive and CPUC officials discussing which judge to appoint to a case over gas rates. The executive objects to one judge for having a history of being hard on the utility. The emails are the latest in a series released by the utility and others that allegedly show PG&E executives privately negotiating with CPUC officials.

The commission's decision fines PG&E $1 million for the emails about the judge and requires PG&E shareholders to cover a portion of the proposed rate increase instead of utility customers.

Shareholders could be on the hook for as much as an estimated $400 million, though ratepayer advocates say the commission has discretion to require a much lower figure.

The decision also restricts back-channel contact between commission members and the state's largest utility.

Ratepayer advocates were demanding that the commission release tens of thousands of additional emails that they say may also show illegal contact between the CPUC and the state's largest utility. The commission did not address that request.

An alternative proposal before the commission did not call for a fine or any shareholder contribution.

PG&E spokesman Keith Stephens said in a statement before the vote that the emails in question were inappropriate and some violated the CPUC's rules. But he said PG&E reported them, held people accountable and was “making significant and voluntary changes designed to prevent this from happening again.”

Commission member Mike Florio, who was involved in an email exchange over the assignment of judges, recused himself from the vote as did commission President Michael Peevey. He received a copy of at least one of those emails and has announced he will not seek reappointment when his term ends at the end of the year.Bay Area Newsjudge sharingPG&ESan Bruno

If you find our journalism valuable and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner membership program.
Find out more at www.sfexaminer.com/join/

Just Posted

Study: Banning cars on Market had minimal effect on side streets

A traffic nightmare. Congestions madness. Carmageddon. Those were the fears voiced by… Continue reading

Police Commission president calls for probe into allegations of ‘rampant’ anti-black bias in SFPD

A newly surfaced email alleging widespread anti-black bias in San Francisco’s police… Continue reading

Breed declares local emergency to counter threat of coronavirus

City officials warn against discrimination while they prepare for the possibility of an outbreak.

Educators warn of possible strike after district calls for budget cuts, layoffs

SFUSD faces up to $31.8 million shortfall in current school year

Sting builds tuneful ‘Last Ship’

Vivid score, great singers buoy pop star’s musical

Most Read