Kirkland and Ellis - PG&E Federal Court Monitor

 Kirkland and Ellis - PG&E Federal Court Monitor

U.S. Attorneys » Northern District of California » News

SHARE

Department of Justice

U.S. Attorney’s Office

Northern District of California

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday, February 27, 2017

Former Deputy Attorney General Selected As Corporate Monitor Over Pacific Gas And Electric Company

Mark Filip will serve as Compliance and Ethics Monitor

SAN FRANCISCO—  Former Acting Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General of the U.S. Department of Justice Mark Filip, now a Chicago-based partner with the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, has been jointly selected by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to serve as Compliance and Ethics Monitor of PG&E.  On January 26, 2017, the Honorable Thelton E. Henderson, Senior United States District Judge, ordered PG&E to submit to a five-year period of monitorship as a condition of the company’s probation following its five felony convictions for willful violations of the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act.  The jury also convicted PG&E of corruptly obstructing the federal investigation of the 2010 gas transmission line explosion in San Bruno.  Mr. Filip previously served as a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, as well as an Assistant United States Attorney in the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois. 
 

Topic(s): 

Office and Personnel Updates

Component(s): 

USAO - California, Northern

Updated March 8, 2017

Read More

Five Dead in Utah was relatives of unpaid PG&E Programmer

Five Dead in Utah was relatives of unpaid PG&E Programmer

Read More

REALLY? PG&E TAKES ACTION TO ADDRESS EX PARTE COMMUNICATION ISSUES IDENTIFIED IN SELF-REPORT TO CPUC TODAY; PLEDGES 'NO EXCUSES' COMPLIANCE

PG&E TAKES ACTION TO ADDRESS EX PARTE COMMUNICATION ISSUES IDENTIFIED IN SEL

F-REPORT TO CPUC TODAY; PLEDGES 'NO EXCUSES' COMPLIANCE

Release Date: September 15, 2014
Contact: PG&E External Communications (415) 973-5930

San Francisco, Calif.— Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) today notified the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) that an extensive internal review of nearly five years of emails between the company and officials at the Commission has identified a number of instances in which PG&E believes it violated the CPUC's rules governing communications with the state regulator in the pending Gas Transmission & Storage rate case.

The communications reported to the CPUC today occurred over a three-week period in January, 2014, during which time a number of e-mails were sent to the CPUC concerning the assignment of administrative law judges and commissioners to the Gas Transmission & Storage rate case. These e-mails may have violated CPUC rules prohibiting certain ex parte communications -- meaning communication with decision-makers that takes place without the knowledge of all parties to a proceeding.

These communications were identified after the company voluntarily chose to broaden its internal review of any potential ex parte communications well beyond those communications referenced in a San Bruno motion filed last July. The expanded review included more than 65,000 emails to and from the Commission since early 2010.

Actions to Address

"As a company, we must be committed to complying with both the letter and the spirit of the law and PG&E's own Code of Conduct at all times. No excuses. That is, and must be, the standard for our behavior individually and as a company," Chairman and CEO Tony Earley and President Chris Johns said in a joint letter to employees today.

They outlined actions resulting from the internal review process:

• Three officers will no longer be employed by the company. They are the senior vice president of regulatory affairs, vice president of regulatory relations, and vice president of regulatory proceedings and rates.
• PG&E has appointed Steve Malnight as senior vice president of regulatory relations. Previously, Malnight was vice president of customer energy solutions. Malnight will report to PG&E President Chris Johns.
• The company is creating the new role of chief regulatory compliance officer, whose mandate will be to help oversee compliance with all requirements governing PG&E’s interactions with the CPUC. The position will report to Chairman and CEO Tony Earley and to the Audit Committee of the PG&E Board of Directors.
• The company has engaged Ken Salazar, a partner in the WilmerHale law firm, as special counsel on regulatory compliance matters to assist in developing a best-in-class regulatory compliance model. Salazar has deep experience in regulatory and energy matters. Among his roles has been service as Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Senator from Colorado, Attorney General of Colorado and Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources.
• PG&E plans additional, mandatory training for all employees who routinely interact with PG&E's regulators.

Letter to Employees

In their joint letter announcing these actions to employees, Earley and Johns said, in part:

"As a company, we must be committed to complying with both the letter and the spirit of the law and PG&E's own Code of Conduct at all times. No excuses. That is, and must be, the standard for our behavior individually and as a company.

"We all have a responsibility to know, understand and comply with all of the rules, including PG&E's own Code of Conduct, as they apply to our respective roles.

"In these instances, there was behavior that clearly failed to meet that standard, and we greatly regret that. Even absent an ex parte violation, these actions did not represent the company in the manner we expect of our officers. As a result, we took immediate and definitive action. We’re continuing this review and will take additional actions if warranted.

"Beyond that, it is also clear that we need to take additional steps to raise the level of professionalism and propriety in our interactions with regulators. While many of us have felt that criticism characterizing PG&E's relationship with the CPUC as 'cozy' has been unfair, we need to acknowledge that we have earned some of the criticism and we need to take action to change that.

"As we have said previously, we have been very disappointed by the tone of some emails that have been reviewed. While not violations of regulations, they are unprofessional and unacceptable.

"We've made truly incredible progress in terms of our operational focus and in creating a strong safety culture at PG&E. But to be successful, it's also critical that our culture demonstrates an unfailing commitment to conducting our business in compliance with both the letter and spirit of the law and our Code of Conduct and with a high degree of professionalism."

PG&E's filing with the CPUC can be read here.

About PG&E

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, a subsidiary of PG&E Corporation (NYSE:PCG), is one of the largest combined natural gas and electric utilities in the United States. Based in San Francisco, with more than 20,000 employees, the company delivers some of the nation’s cleanest energy to nearly 16 million people in Northern and Central California. For more information, visit www.pge.com/ and https://www.pge.com/about/newsroom/.

Read More

Who is behind the web site www.pgewitness.com

Images: #PGEWITNESS

For a list of my customers and clients click here.  The list references decades of how my customers have been murdered.

1. I am a former PG&E Contract Programmer.  
2. I remain unpaid, 
3. I’ve been beaten regularly for ten years or longer 
4. My software clients and customers over 35 years are:
   
   
1. PG&E, Bank of America 
2. Wells Fargo Bank 
3. AT&T formerly SBC Services (AT&T Reverse merger)
4. Wendy's 
5. Tony Romas 
6. AT&T
7. PacBell 
8. Contra Costa County 
9. Contra Costa College District 
10. GE Nuclear 
11. City of Walnut Creek. 

Read More

Blessed by Walnut Creek and Trinity Center - my taxes paid for my losses

Read More

PG&E to face criminal charges in trial linked to San Bruno blast

The PG&E Gas Can Man is either a ghost or the secret sauce needed to prove domestic terrorism. 
Top
Nancy McFadden PG&E COS now employed by Jerry Brown
Howard V.  Golub who has a son my sons age tutored by his classmate – my son whose friend was Ryan Fuchs killed in Danville. 
Peter A. Darbee lives 1.3 miles from accident scene where my car was totaled in Lafayette.
Michael Peevey whose stupidity was thinking they could rigged or stage accidents to shift burden to Rate Payers. 
 
 
By George Avalos, gavalos@bayareanewsgroup.com
POSTED:   06/13/2016 03:29:00 PM PDT | UPDATED:   118 MIN. AGO
SAN BRUNO -- In a federal trial that could bring closure to San Bruno residents devastated by the 2010 pipeline disaster, PG&E faces an array of criminal charges linked to the explosion that killed eight people and demolished a Peninsula neighborhood.
Jury selection for the trial, in which PG&E faces 13 criminal counts, is scheduled to begin Tuesday in U.S. District Court in San Francisco. The charges include one count of obstruction of a federal probe into the blast and 12 counts that it violated pipeline safety regulations. If convicted on all 13 charges, the utility giant could be fined up to $562 million.

File photo: Crews load an abandoned segment of pipe that was once part of the gas line that exploded in San Bruno last year.in San Bruno , Calif., on Friday , July 29 , 2011. (JOHN GREEN/Staff archives)
Investigators believe the deadly explosion was caused by a lethal combination of negligence, poor record keeping and lazy oversight. Federal prosecutors are likely to contend in the trial that PG&E's hunger to harvest a bumper crop of profits from ratepayers caused the company to neglect the safety of its customers.
"PG&E's willful decisions not to maintain records, conduct proper pipeline assessments and otherwise comply with federal pipeline safety regulations were part of a corporate culture of prioritizing profits over safety," federal prosecutors wrote in papers filed in November with the federal court.
PG&E has pleaded not guilty to all the charges.
Advertisement
"The San Bruno explosion was a tragic accident, and we have demonstrated our accountability," said Greg Snapper, a PG&E spokesman. "We have seen no evidence that PG&E employees intentionally violated the Pipeline Safety Act or obstructed justice."
City officials in San Bruno are eager for the long-delayed trial to begin.
"We believe PG&E is guilty of a dereliction of its duty to protect the citizens of San Bruno and customers all over their service area," San Bruno Mayor James Ruane said in an interview with this newspaper. "We hope this trial will bring about justice and transparency, which PG&E has not opened up to."
San Francisco-based PG&E has undertaken numerous steps to upgrade and repair its vast web of natural gas pipelines, including the construction of a gas-control facility that serves as a high-tech nerve center for its pipeline system.
Still, company officials did not answer the question directly when asked recently why, if PG&E has demonstrated accountability for the Sept. 9, 2010, disaster, the utility did not plead guilty to the criminal charges.
"It is one thing to accept responsibility for the obvious facts of an explosion and the damage and destruction that was caused," said San Bruno City Manager Connie Jackson. "But it is another thing entirely to accept true responsibility for the negligence that caused the system to fail and create the disaster."
State regulators in April 2015 hit PG&E with a $1.6 billion penalty for causing the explosion, the largest financial punishment ever imposed on an American utility.
"It is rare for corporations to actually go on trial," said Peter Henning, a professor of law with Wayne State University in Detroit. "PG&E may feel they have already gotten a black eye in public. Sometimes corporations draw a line in the sand and tell the prosecutors to prove their case."
Among the high-profile witnesses who are expected to be called to bolster the prosecution's case is former PG&E Chief Executive Peter Darbee, the company's top boss in the years before the explosion and when the blast occurred. Darbee received a $34.8 million severance package when he left the company in 2011.
Prosecutors also intend to call Leslie McNiece, a former PG&E executive, as a witness. McNiece is expected to testify she encountered opposition and pushback from top company executives in connection with her PG&E-ordered task of improving the utility's record keeping on its pipelines.
Eight current or former PG&E executives have received court-ordered immunity, according to case documents filed by the U.S. attorney's office. Darbee is not getting immunity.
Brian Cherry, a former PG&E regulatory executive who received immunity, will testify about the utility's statements to the PUC and the National Transportation Safety Board regarding an array of issues, including company policies about gas pipe pressure and pipeline records.
William Hayes, a PG&E gas operations executive who was a company representative for the NTSB probe into the explosion, will testify about the utility's policies regarding when it would test for problems in older pipelines -- and what PG&E told the NTSB about those policies.
"This is at the heart of the obstruction charge," prosecutors said in court papers.
The original indictment against PG&E came in April 2014. The trial was initially set to begin in March, but a flurry of motions by PG&E's defense team delayed the start of the trial several times.
"There have been a lot of tricks and a lot of delays by PG&E," said state Sen. Jerry Hill, whose San Mateo County district includes San Bruno. "Almost six years after the explosion, people will finally see some justice in this, and the families may be able to go on with their lives."
Contact George Avalos at 408-859-5167. Follow him at Twitter.com/georgeavalos.

Read More

The Kinder Morgan / EBMUD Explosion

The Kinder Morgan / EBMUD Explosion
The Alternate Theory

Read More

PG&E Offers $10,000 Reward In Walnut Creek Kidnapping

PG&E Offers $10,000 Reward In Walnut Creek Kidnapping And Robbery Case

The Kidnap Victim took over the project Pete Bennett started in February 2011. Then someone kidnapped my sons.

The Forgotten PG&E Kidnapping Case

PG&E Offers $10,000 Reward In Walnut Creek Kidnapping And Robbery Case



Release Date: November 20, 2012

Contact: PG&E External Communications (415) 973-5930




Release Date: November 20, 2012

Contact: PG&E External Communications (415) 973-5930



WALNUT CREEK, Calif. – Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) today announced a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the individuals responsible for kidnapping a PG&E contract employee in a parking lot as she left work on November 7 in the Walnut Creek Shadelands area.

On November 7, 2012 at approximately 7:30 p.m., a 57 year old female was abducted as she was leaving work and walking to her vehicle in an isolated parking lot. As the victim unlocked her vehicle two suspects ran up to her, forced her into her vehicle, tied her up and blindfolded her. The victim was driven to various locations in an attempt to get money from her ATM accounts.

The victim was driven to an isolated area in the Oakland Hills where she was released. A vehicle with a loud muffler was heard leaving the area. The victim was able to free herself and called 911. Oakland PD responded and sought medical attention for the victim and obtained the initial information. The Walnut Creek Police Department was called to handle the primary investigation since the incident originated in Walnut Creek.

Suspect #1: Described as a white male adult, early to mid 20s, 5’11”, 185/190 lbs, broad shoulders, short dark hair, unknown facial hair. Last seen wearing light colored T shirt under a black zip up colored shirt, jeans, blue or black.

Suspect #2: Described as a white male adult, early to mid 20s, 5’9”, 150 lbs with a slight build. Last seen wearing a mask (form type to below the nose), black hooded sweatshirt with the hood up, dark jeans.

Suspect Vehicle: Vehicle with a loud muffler.

The Walnut Creek Police Department is actively investigating this crime. Anyone with information related to this crime is asked to contact the Walnut Creek Police Department Investigations Unit at (925) 943-5868 or (925) 943-5844.


The photos below are of one of the kidnapping/robbery/carjacking suspects in this case. The photos are from a drive up bank ATM. The suspect in the photo went by the name "Aubrey" (see suspect #2 description below). The second suspect went by the name "David". It is important to stress we do not know if these are the suspect's actual names.

Read More