PG&E outlasts judicial thorn, probation ends soon

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. has outlasted its most persistent judicial thorn in its side, though the utility still faces multiple criminal charges and investigations by district attorneys over wildfires.

In an order filed Friday, Senior U.S. District Judge William Alsup of San Francisco denied motions in amicus briefs seeking to extend PG&E's criminal probation past midnight Jan. 25.

Alsup's decision followed one by Northern District U.S. Attorney Stephanie M. Hinds not to try to extend PG&E's criminal probation. The judge said he would consider any proposal prosecutors recommended, but they did not do so.

Hinds, noting that district attorneys in Sonoma and Shasta counties are prosecuting felony criminal cases against PG&E for wildfires there, concluded that state courts are the "proper forum for further development of the evidence."

"Accordingly, based on the unique history and circumstances of this case, the United States does not intend to seek an extension of PG&E's probationary term or imposition of a new one, while acknowledging that there appears to be no binding case law on point," Hinds wrote.

Attorneys who represent ratepayers and had urged the utility's criminal probation be extended responded to the news with disgust, and blamed federal prosecutors.

"I have never seen such dereliction of duty on the part of the U.S. attorney's office as in the PG&E case," said Michael J. Aguirre, a partner with Aguirre & Severson LLP who represents PG&E ratepayers and filed an amicus brief.

"To say there is no way to continue the probation of this recidivist criminal is absurd," Aguirre said in a telephone interview Friday. "It's disgusting."

Aguirre praised Alsup for his efforts to supervise PG&E's probation but said federal prosecutors "sat on the sidelines" and have done nothing to protect the public even as deadly wildfires have raged during the past few years.

The role has fallen to Alsup, who has exercised extraordinary authority over PG&E, requiring changes and demanding answers from the utility to try to stop fires in Northern California.

The federal judge's authority has stemmed from the utility's criminal probation after conviction of six crimes involving the 2010 San Bruno gas pipeline explosion. U.S. v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 14-CR-00175 (N.D. Cal., filed April 1, 2014).

Alsup has continued to pepper PG&E -- represented by Jenner & Block LLP partner Reid J. Schar and other lawyers -- with questions about wildfires in recent months and the utility's response. But in a few weeks, the judge won't be asking any more questions and PG&E won't need to respond to Alsup.

James Noonan, a PG&E spokesman, referred to the reports filed in court by a federal monitor last month.

"The progress that PG&E highlighted is real and we have tried to acknowledge it in a balanced and forthright way," the Kirkland & Ellis LLP report states. "Put differently, and perhaps more optimistically, improvements by PG&E, if realized, can save lives, and also prevent property damage and human disruption, in the future for the people of California."

Aguirre conceded that an attempt to extend PG&E's probation would not automatically succeed and that the utility would challenge such a decision in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. He also doubted Alsup would be able to do it himself without a Justice Department request. "It would be very hard to get that past the 9th Circuit," Aguirre said.

Aguirre is angry the U.S. attorney's office didn't make the attempt. "They want to run away," he said.