CPUC workshop advances plan to standardize reliability data; IOUs urge phased approach

The California Public Utilities Commission on Wednesday convened a workshop to shape a rulemaking track aimed at improving how investor‑owned utilities report outage and reliability data to the agency.

Commissioner Matt Baker, the proceeding’s assigned commissioner, said the effort is meant to help the commission and the public better understand outages and their causes. "For many Californians, a reliable electric grid is not just a convenience of modern life. It is an absolute necessity," Commissioner Matt Baker said, framing the proceeding around customers' lived experience.

Why this matters: CPUC staff and stakeholders said current reliability reporting is fragmented across multiple filings and agencies, which makes it difficult to assemble a clear, timely picture of outages for regulators, local governments and customers. Eric Swanson, a research data specialist with the CPUC safety policy division, summarized one key consequence: "There can be a lag of up to 10 months between an outage event and the CPUC receiving a report assessing it." That delay, staff said, often forces ad hoc data requests and leaves gaps in near‑term oversight and public communication.

Staff proposal and framework

CPUC staff presented a three‑part technical framework staff envisions to address data silos: a data governance protocol to set standards and access rules; a data dictionary to standardize field names and definitions; and a data‑reporting schema to organize how data are submitted and linked. Staff described three possible data‑transfer approaches to implement the schema: (1) a central database that would house standardized, relational data; (2) an enhanced secure file transfer process as an interim or lower‑cost mechanism; and (3) targeted updates to existing reliability filings.

Britney Gaines, a CPUC research data specialist, explained the pieces: the data dictionary would be "a collection of standardized terms and definitions" so that similar fields across reports could be joined reliably. Program manager Jim Cho urged practicality: the process should be "feasible and reasonable" and produce outcomes customers can use.

What staff wants from parties: examples of specific fields, feasible reporting frequencies, and suggestions for protecting confidential customer and critical infrastructure information while improving access for regulators and authorized local partners.

What utilities said

Presenters from Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric said they support the goal of reducing data silos and improving reliability measurement but urged a phased approach that first augments existing filings rather than immediately building a new statewide database.

John Eric Coleman, lead for PG&E’s system performance, reliability and resiliency strategy team, said the company is already working on multiyear improvements and emphasized data quality: "We strongly believe that the integrity of the data is everything," he said. PG&E staff and other IOU presenters stressed that many types of outage and asset information are already captured in internal systems (outage management systems, AMI/SCADA feeds and quarterly geodatabases) but that linking across datasets requires careful validation and resources.

Common concerns IOUs raised

- Granularity and keys: Utilities noted meter‑level data can enable more precise customer‑experience analysis, but warned that circuit identifiers are not always stable because operational switching can reassign meters to different circuits. Several presenters cautioned that circuit ID alone may not serve as a reliable cross‑dataset join key.

- Timing and QA/QC: Multiple utilities said outage data routinely undergo internal validation after events; that review can take days to months for complex incidents, and quicker reporting can increase labor and cost. One staff presentation cited a roughly 10‑month lag for some filings.

- Confidentiality and security: Utilities highlighted customer privacy and critical electric infrastructure information (including CEII‑sensitive details). Staff noted the possibility of tiered access controls; staff also said the CPUC is not proposing public raw access to CPUC‑housed, high‑granularity datasets.

- Cost and feasibility: All IOUs urged that the CPUC prioritize achievable near‑term changes to existing reports (for example, adding year‑to‑date outage counts or planned/unplanned flags) and use secure file transfer as an interim data exchange while longer‑term database options are evaluated.

Local governments, advocates and other stakeholders

Local government and community representatives pressed staff and the utilities for data that reflects individual customers' experiences and notification effectiveness, not only averaged metrics. Ian Fisher of the Public Advocates Office urged the proceeding to prioritize customer‑level measures and the effectiveness of utility notifications during outages and PSPS events.

Stakeholders also asked for clearer, standardized crosswalks showing how the CPUC’s proposed schema would map to existing filings such as PSPS post‑season reports, the Wildfire Mitigation Plan quarterly data report (WMP QDR), and annual reliability filings.

Discussion outcomes and next steps

Staff said it will use workshop feedback to draft a staff proposal describing options and next steps. A CPUC representative said staff aims to issue that proposal soon and continue the rulemaking in subsequent tracks to refine definitions, reporting thresholds, protections for confidential information and feasible implementation schedules.

The workshop produced broad agreement on objectives (reduce siloing, standardize definitions, better measure customer impacts), plus divergent views on pace and scope. Utilities generally favored incremental changes to existing reports with interim secure transfers and careful attention to QA/QC and cost; many stakeholders urged that staff ensure a clear path to customer‑level insights and usable local data.

A longer regulatory and technical process remains: staff and parties will have to define required fields, reporting frequencies, confidentiality rules and funding or resourcing plans before a centralized data platform could be implemented.

Looking ahead

CPUC staff asked parties to comment on priority fields, acceptable reporting cadences and confidentiality constraints as staff prepares a written proposal. The CPUC also plans additional workshops on feasibility and on the specific data elements the commission should require or collect.

Quotes in this story come from workshop speakers and staff presentations at the California Public Utilities Commission reliability data workshop. The CPUC will post slides and a recording from the session on its website.