A 37-page analysis performed by three UCAN experts concluded that the Commission should turn off the lights on an SDG&E proposal to "de-energize" over 45,000 customers who live in rural San Diego County during fire threats.   The experts concluded that SDG&E's plan might actually increase fire risk, rather than decrease it.   It also found that it was inadequately evaluated,  contained misleading data and couldn't be economically or legally justified.   To read the entire report, click on the attached file below, or download here.

Subsequently,  on April 30th, UCAN joined with a large coalition of other interests  (schools, water districts, telephone companies,agriculture and consumer representatives) to file an unprecedented motion to dismiss (click on attachment below) asking the CPUC to summarily reject the SDG&E proposal.

The Commission chose, incredibly. not to hold evidentiary hearings on the proposal even though a large number of experts contested SDG&E's claim.   A decision is expected sometime this summer, but it was delayed given the strong opposition and SDG&E's exceedingly weak case.

SDG&E tried to use its PR machine to drum up community support for its proposal.   So far, it is has fallen short.   The County voted 4-0 to reject the shut-off plan.   And the San Diego City Council has jumped into the act, but appears to have backed down from supporting SDG&E......despite Marti Emerald's strong lobbying on behalf of SDG&E's plan.  UCAN joined with other interests to explain why the plan was ill-conceived.  (see attachment)