Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Performance Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Energy Safety performance division reports 5,000 inspections in 2025, flags data accuracy and staffing needs
Summary
Patrick Doherty, program manager of Energy Safety’s Performance Assessment Division, told the board the division conducted over 5,000 inspections in 2025, issued 89 notices of non‑performance or data inaccuracy, and reported nearly 600 wildfire safety concerns to utilities. He outlined the division’s shift toward performance assessment and data governance under SB254.
Patrick Doherty, program manager for the Performance Assessment Division at the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, briefed the Wildfire Safety Advisory Board on June 3 about the division's recent activities, staffing changes and inspection results.
Doherty described the division's evolution from the earlier Compliance Assurance unit and noted that, after filling positions in 2024 and reorganizing environmental scientists into a separate vegetation‑management unit, the office changed the group's name to Performance Assessment on Jan. 1, 2026 to reflect SB254's performance‑focused mandate.
He said the division now applies a five‑dimensional rubric in annual performance reports: WMP initiative attainment, data governance and consistency, PSPS event analysis, risk metrics (ignitions, outages, wires down) and outcome metrics (acres burned, structures destroyed). "Field inspections are super important," Doherty said, describing inspectors' role in validating that reported work was actually completed and in surfacing wildfire safety concerns.
Doherty reported 2025 statistics: roughly 5,000 inspections statewide (covering all six electrical corporations), 89 instances that led to notices of non‑performance or data inaccuracy, and about 600 separate wildfire safety concerns reported to utilities. He said inspections also produce intelligence that can guide future audits and targeted investigations.
The presentation covered the independent evaluator program (authorized by statute and overseen in coordination with the state fire marshal and CalFire), upcoming annual performance reporting deadlines, and the division's interest in folding more one‑off performance investigations into future annual reports.
Doherty flagged persistent challenges: data quality and timing across utilities, the need for consistent asset and circuit identifiers to enable comparisons and cross‑year tracking, and the continuing development of staff experience and human resources within a relatively new team.
Ending: Board members asked about coordination with CPUC safety divisions; Doherty described regular staff‑to‑staff contact and a standing monthly meeting with CPUC units. The board thanked Doherty and encouraged continued focus on data governance as a foundation for performance oversight.
