Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Auditing And Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Regulators seek ideas on audits and tracking WMP spending; Energy Safety to update independent‑evaluator rules
Summary
CPUC and Energy Safety solicited stakeholder proposals for reporting and auditing to prevent diversion of WMP funds and clarified independent‑evaluator rules: utilities have 60 days to contract from the approved list and an evaluator can remain for a WMP cycle but not for back‑to‑back cycles.
CPUC and Energy Safety asked stakeholders for proposals on reporting, auditing, and consequences to ensure WMP revenue requirements are spent on approved wildfire mitigation initiatives and not diverted to other GRC components.
Ian Fisher (Cal Advocates) urged against using staff resolutions to make large procedural changes and recommended a formal rulemaking to create a robust record. "I would thoroughly recommend some sort of rulemaking, frankly," Fisher said, citing past experience where staff resolution processes proved inadequate for major implementation changes.
Patrick Doherty described the statutory schedule for WMP implementation auditing and explained the independent evaluator program: Energy Safety updates the approved independent evaluator list annually; utilities have up to 60 days to contract with an evaluator on the list, and an evaluator may serve for the duration of a WMP cycle if they remain eligible — but Energy Safety plans to prevent using the same evaluator on back‑to‑back WMP cycles.
