XML 63 R33.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.22.4

WILDFIRE-RELATED CONTINGENCIES | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
WILDFIRE-RELATED CONTINGENCIES | WILDFIRE-RELATED CONTINGENCIES Liability Overview PG&E Corporation and the Utility have significant contingencies arising from their operations, including contingencies related to wildfires. A provision for a loss contingency is recorded when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated. PG&E Corporation and the Utility evaluate which potential liabilities are probable and the related range of reasonably estimated losses and record a charge that reflects their best estimate or the lower end of the range, if there is no better estimate. Assessing whether a loss is probable or reasonably possible, whether the loss or a range of losses is estimable, and the amount of the best estimate or lower end of the range often requires management to exercise significant judgment about future events. Management makes these assessments based on a number of assumptions and subjective factors, including negotiations (including those during mediations with claimants), discovery, settlements and payments, rulings, advice of legal counsel, and other information and events pertaining to a particular matter, and estimates based on currently available information and prior experience with wildfires. Loss contingencies are reviewed quarterly, and estimates are adjusted to reflect the impact of all known information. As more information becomes available, including from potential claimants as litigation or resolution efforts progress, management estimates and assumptions regarding the potential financial impacts of wildfire events may change. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s provision for loss and expense excludes anticipated legal costs, which are expensed as incurred. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows may be materially affected by the outcome of the following matters. Potential liabilities related to wildfires depend on various factors, including the cause of the fire, contributing causes of the fire (including alternative potential origins, weather- and climate-related issues, and forest management and fire suppression practices), the number, size and type of structures damaged or destroyed, the contents of such structures and other personal property damage, the number and types of trees damaged or destroyed, attorneys’ fees for claimants, the nature and extent of any personal injuries, including the loss of lives, the amount of fire suppression and clean-up costs, other damages the Utility may be responsible for if found negligent, and the amount of any penalties, fines, or restitution that may be imposed by courts or other governmental entities. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of numerous civil complaints related to the following wildfire events and expect that they may receive further such complaints. The complaints include claims based on multiple theories of liability, including inverse condemnation, negligence, violations of the Public Utilities Code, violations of the Health & Safety Code, premises liability, trespass, public nuisance and private nuisance. The plaintiffs in each action principally assert that PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s alleged failure to properly maintain, inspect, and de-energize their transmission lines was the cause of the relevant wildfire. The timing and outcome for resolution of any such claims or investigations are uncertain. The Utility believes it will continue to receive additional information from potential claimants in connection with these wildfire events as litigation or resolution efforts progress. Any such additional information may potentially allow PG&E Corporation and the Utility to refine the estimates of their accrued losses and may result in changes to the accrual depending on the information received. PG&E Corporation and the Utility intend to vigorously defend themselves against both criminal charges and civil complaints. If the Utility’s facilities, such as its electric distribution and transmission lines, are judicially determined to be the substantial cause of the following matters, and the doctrine of inverse condemnation applies, the Utility could be liable for property damage, business interruption, interest and attorneys’ fees without having been found negligent. California courts have imposed liability under the doctrine of inverse condemnation in legal actions brought by property holders against utilities on the grounds that losses borne by the person whose property was damaged through a public use undertaking should be spread across the community that benefited from such undertaking, and based on the assumption that utilities have the ability to recover these costs through rates. Further, California courts have determined that the doctrine of inverse condemnation is applicable regardless of whether the CPUC ultimately allows recovery by the utility for any such costs. The CPUC may decide not to authorize cost recovery even if a court decision were to determine that the Utility is liable as a result of the application of the doctrine of inverse condemnation. In addition to claims for property damage, business interruption, interest and attorneys’ fees under inverse condemnation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility could be liable for fire suppression costs, evacuation costs, medical expenses, personal injury damages, punitive damages and other damages under other theories of liability in connection with the following wildfire events, including if PG&E Corporation or the Utility were found to have been negligent. Unless expressly noted otherwise, the loss accruals in this Note reflect the lower end of the range of the reasonably estimable range of losses. PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe that it is reasonably possible that the amount of loss could be greater than the accrued estimated amounts but are unable to reasonably estimate the additional loss and the upper end of the range because, as described above, there are a number of unknown facts and legal considerations that may impact the amount of any potential liability, including the total scope and nature of claims that may be asserted against PG&E Corporation and the Utility and the outcome of the criminal proceeding initiated against the Utility in connection with the 2020 Zogg fire. If the liability for wildfires were to exceed $1.0 billion in the aggregate in any Coverage Year, the Utility may be eligible to make a claim to the Wildfire Fund under AB 1054 to satisfy settled or finally adjudicated eligible claims in excess of such amount, except that claims related to the 2019 Kincade fire would be subject to the 40% limitation on the allowed amount of claims arising before emergence from bankruptcy. PG&E Corporation and the Utility intend to continue to review the available information and other information as it becomes available, including evidence in the possession of Cal Fire, USFS, or the relevant district attorney’s office, evidence from or held by other parties, claims that have not yet been submitted, and additional information about the nature and extent of personal and business property damages and losses, the nature, number and severity of personal injuries, and information made available through the discovery process. 2019 Kincade Fire According to Cal Fire, on October 23, 2019 at approximately 9:27 p.m. Pacific Time, a wildfire began northeast of Geyserville in Sonoma County, California (the “2019 Kincade fire”), located in the service area of the Utility. According to a Cal Fire incident update dated March 3, 2020, 3:35 p.m. Pacific Time, the 2019 Kincade fire consumed 77,758 acres and resulted in no fatalities, four first responder injuries, 374 structures destroyed, and 60 structures damaged. In connection with the 2019 Kincade fire, state and local officials issued numerous mandatory evacuation orders and evacuation warnings. Based on County of Sonoma information, PG&E Corporation and the Utility understand that the geographic zones subject to either a mandatory evacuation order or an evacuation warning between October 23, 2019 and November 4, 2019 included approximately 200,000 persons. On July 16, 2020, Cal Fire issued a press release with its determination that the Utility’s equipment caused the 2019 Kincade fire. On April 6, 2021, the Sonoma County District Attorney’s Office (“the Sonoma D.A.”) filed a complaint charging the Utility with five felonies and 28 misdemeanors related to the 2019 Kincade fire. On January 28, 2022, the Sonoma D.A. filed the Kincade Amended Complaint, which replaced two felonies with five different felonies and dropped six misdemeanor counts. On April 8, 2022, the Utility and the Sonoma D.A. filed a civil stipulated judgment to resolve the criminal prosecution of the Utility in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire (the “Kincade Stipulation”) without the Utility admitting any liability. Subject to the terms and conditions of the Kincade Stipulation, the Utility will pay a total of $20.25 million, which will not be recoverable through rates. Pursuant to the Kincade Stipulation, the Utility has also agreed to: (i) fill at least 80 new internal employee positions headquartered in or serving Sonoma County; (ii) take certain wildfire mitigation actions consistent with its WMP; and (iii) engage an independent compliance monitor for at least five years to monitor the Utility’s compliance with certain commitments under the Kincade Stipulation, including its commitments to carry out vegetation management and equipment inspections in Sonoma County consistent with its WMP. After the Kincade Stipulation was entered by the Sonoma County Superior Court, the Sonoma D.A. moved to dismiss the Kincade Amended Complaint with prejudice, and the court granted the motion on April 11, 2022. In the first quarter of 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded $20.25 million within Other current liabilities and Other noncurrent liabilities in connection with the Kincade Stipulation. As of December 31, 2022, $5.45 million has been paid pursuant to the Kincade Stipulation. On July 14, 2022, the CPUC issued final approval of a settlement between the SED and the Utility (the “Kincade SED Settlement”). The Kincade SED Settlement resolves SED’s investigation into the 2019 Kincade fire and provides for the removal of approximately 70 transmission lines or portions of lines that are no longer in service and are de-energized but have not been removed as required by CPUC rules. The Kincade SED Settlement provides that the Utility (i) will pay $40 million to California’s General Fund; (ii) will remove permanently abandoned transmission lines over a ten-year period; and (iii) must incur $85 million of the costs of such work by December 31, 2024, for which it may not seek recovery. SED agreed to refrain from instituting enforcement proceedings against the Utility for not having removed the lines previously. The Kincade SED Settlement states that it does not constitute an admission by the Utility of violations of GOs or statutory requirements. In the third quarter of 2021, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded $40 million within Other current liabilities in connection with the Kincade SED Settlement. As of December 31, 2022, $20 million has been paid to California’s General Fund pursuant to the Kincade SED Settlement. For the $85 million of cost of removal that the Utility will not seek recovery, the Utility recorded such disallowances in the first quarter of 2022 upon identification of the facilities to be removed. As of February 16, 2023, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of approximately 113 complaints on behalf of at least 2,720 plaintiffs related to the 2019 Kincade fire. The plaintiffs filed master complaints on July 16, 2021; PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s response was filed on August 16, 2021; and PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed a demurrer with respect to the plaintiffs’ inverse condemnation claims. On December 10, 2021, the court overruled the demurrer. The court scheduled trial for November 7, 2022, which it vacated on October 11, 2022. In addition, on January 5, 2022, Cal Fire filed a complaint against the Utility in the coordinated proceeding seeking to recover approximately $90 million for fire suppression and other costs incurred in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire. The Utility filed an answer to Cal Fire’s complaint on February 4, 2022. On April 28, 2022, subrogation plaintiffs filed a motion for summary adjudication of their inverse condemnation cause of action in the coordinated proceeding. The court scheduled a hearing on this summary adjudication motion for August 5, 2022, which it vacated on July 29, 2022. On October 26, 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility entered an agreement with substantially all of the insurance subrogation plaintiffs to resolve their claims arising from the 2019 Kincade fire. Additionally, on July 20, 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed a motion for summary adjudication on individual plaintiffs’ claims for punitive damages. The court scheduled a hearing on this summary adjudication motion for October 7, 2022, which it vacated on October 6, 2022. On October 11, 2022, the Utility entered into a tolling agreement with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (“Cal OES”), which remains in effect. Based on the current state of the law concerning inverse condemnation in California and the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including Cal Fire’s determination of the cause and the information gathered as part of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s investigation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe it is probable that they will incur a loss in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire. PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $800 million as of December 31, 2021 (before available insurance). Based on the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this report, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded additional charges during 2022 for potential losses in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire of $225 million, for an aggregate liability of $1.025 billion (before available insurance). PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s accrued estimated losses of $1.025 billion do not include, among other things: (i) any amounts for potential penalties or fines that may be imposed by courts or other governmental entities on PG&E Corporation or the Utility, (ii) any punitive damages, (iii) any amounts in respect of compensation claims by federal or state agencies other than state fire suppression costs, (iv) evacuation costs, or (v) any other amounts that are not reasonably estimable. The following table presents changes in the lower end of the range of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s reasonably estimable range of losses for claims arising from the 2019 Kincade fire since December 31, 2021.
Loss Accrual (in millions) |
Balance at December 31, 2021 | $ | 769 |
Accrued Losses | 225 |
Payments | (344) |
Balance at December 31, 2022 | $ | 650 |
The Utility has liability insurance coverage for third-party liability attributable to the 2019 Kincade fire in an aggregate amount of $430 million. As of December 31, 2022, the Utility recorded an insurance receivable for the full amount of $430 million. 2020 Zogg Fire According to Cal Fire, on September 27, 2020, at approximately 4:03 p.m. Pacific Time, a wildfire began in the area of Zogg Mine Road and Jenny Bird Lane, north of Igo in Shasta County, California (the “2020 Zogg fire”), located in the service area of the Utility. According to a Cal Fire incident update dated October 16, 2020, 3:08 p.m. Pacific Time, the 2020 Zogg fire consumed 56,338 acres and resulted in four fatalities, one injury, 204 structures destroyed, and 27 structures damaged. On March 22, 2021, Cal Fire issued a press release with its determination that the 2020 Zogg fire was caused by a pine tree contacting electrical facilities owned and operated by the Utility located north of the community of Igo. On September 24, 2021, the Shasta County District Attorney’s Office charged the Utility with 11 felonies and 20 misdemeanors related to the 2020 Zogg fire, the 2020 Daniel fire, the 2020 Ponder fire, and the 2021 Woody fire. On September 24, 2021, PG&E Corporation and the Utility announced that they disputed the charges. They further announced that they would accept Cal Fire’s finding that a Utility electric line caused the 2020 Zogg fire, even though PG&E Corporation and the Utility did not have access to all of the evidence that Cal Fire gathered. On November 18, 2021, the Utility filed a demurrer to 10 of the 31 counts. On May 2, 2022, the Shasta County Superior Court overruled the demurrer. On June 9, 2022, the Utility entered a plea of not guilty to all of the charges. At the conclusion of the preliminary hearing conducted in January and February 2023, the court dismissed 20 of the 31 counts, including all charges related to the three smaller fires as well as all charges relating to air contamination. On February 3, 2023, the Shasta County District Attorney’s Office filed a superseding charging document, which charges the Utility with the 11 remaining counts. The court has set a trial date on those charges for June 6, 2023. Under California law (including Penal Code section 1202.4), if the Utility were convicted of any of the charges, the sentencing court must order the Utility to “make restitution to the victim or victims in an amount established by court order” that is “sufficient to fully reimburse the victim or victims for every determined economic loss incurred as the result of” the Utility’s underlying conduct, in addition to interest and the victim’s or victims’ attorneys’ fees. This requirement for full reimbursement of economic loss is not waivable by either the government or the victims and is not offset by any compensation that the victims have received or may receive from their insurance carriers. If convicted of any of the charges, the Utility could be subject to fines, penalties, and restitution to victims for their economic losses (including property damage, medical and mental health expenses, lost wages, lost profits, attorneys’ fees and interest), as well as non-monetary remedies such as oversight requirements. If convicted of any of the charges, the Utility currently believes that its total losses associated with the fire could materially exceed the accrued estimated liabilities that PG&E Corporation and the Utility have recorded to reflect the lower end of the range of the reasonably estimable range of losses. The Utility is unable to determine a reasonable estimate of the amount of such additional losses. The Utility does not expect that any of its liability insurance would be available to cover restitution payments ordered by the court presiding over the criminal proceeding. On October 25, 2022, the SED issued a proposed administrative enforcement order alleging that the Utility violated CPUC regulations and Public Utilities Code Section 451 in connection with the CPUC’s investigation of the 2020 Zogg fire. The proposed order recommends a penalty of $155 million. On February 21, 2023, the Utility and the SED filed a joint motion for approval of a settlement agreement (the “Zogg SED Settlement”). The Zogg SED Settlement provides that the Utility would (i) pay $10 million to California’s General Fund; (ii) implement certain enhancements to its vegetation management processes; (iii) incur $140 million in connection with certain initiatives specified in the Zogg SED Settlement, and the Utility may not seek recovery of this $140 million of costs. The SED agreed to refrain from instituting any further enforcement proceedings against the Utility related to the 2020 Zogg fire. The Zogg SED Settlement states that it does not constitute an admission or evidence of any wrongdoing, fault, omission, negligence, imprudence, or liability on the part of the Utility. In connection with the Zogg SED Settlement, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability of $10 million reflected in Other current liabilities on the Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2022. For the $140 million of costs for which the Utility will not seek recovery, the Utility expects to record disallowances as such costs are incurred. Various other entities, which may include other law enforcement agencies, may also be investigating the fire. It is uncertain when any such investigations will be complete. As of February 16, 2023, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of approximately 29 complaints on behalf of at least 523 plaintiffs related to the 2020 Zogg fire. The plaintiffs seek damages that include wrongful death, property damage, economic loss, punitive damages, exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees and other damages. The plaintiffs filed master complaints on August 6, 2021, and PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s answer was filed on September 7, 2021, and PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed a demurrer with respect to the plaintiffs’ inverse condemnation claims. On December 10, 2021, the court overruled the demurrer. The court has set a trial date in the coordinated proceeding for August 14, 2023. In addition, on March 18, 2022, Cal Fire filed a complaint against the Utility in the coordinated proceeding seeking to recover approximately $34.5 million for fire suppression and other costs incurred in connection with the 2020 Zogg fire. The Utility filed an answer to Cal Fire’s complaint on May 3, 2022. The Utility and Cal Fire reached a settlement of Cal Fire’s claims and dismissal of Cal Fire’s complaint with prejudice was entered on December 22, 2022. On September 26, 2022, the Utility entered into a tolling agreement with Cal OES, which remains in effect. Based on the current state of the law concerning inverse condemnation in California and the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including Cal Fire’s determination of the cause and the information gathered as part of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s investigation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe it is probable that they will incur a loss in connection with the 2020 Zogg fire. PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $375 million as of December 31, 2021 (before available insurance). Based on the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this report, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded additional charges for potential losses in connection with the 2020 Zogg fire of $25 million, for an aggregate liability of $400 million (before available insurance). PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s accrued estimated losses do not include, among other things: (i) any amounts for potential penalties, fines, or restitution that may be imposed by courts or other governmental entities on PG&E Corporation or the Utility, (ii) any punitive damages, (iii) any amounts in respect of compensation claims by federal or state agencies other than state fire suppression costs, (iv) evacuation costs, or (v) any other amounts that are not reasonably estimable. The following table presents changes in the lower end of the range of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s reasonably estimable range of losses for claims arising from the 2020 Zogg fire since December 31, 2021.
Loss Accrual (in millions) |
Balance at December 31, 2021 | $ | 211 |
Accrued Losses | 25 |
Payments | (204) |
Balance at December 31, 2022 | $ | 32 |
The Utility has liability insurance for third-party liability attributable to the 2020 Zogg fire in an aggregate amount of $611 million. As of December 31, 2022, the Utility recorded an insurance receivable for $370 million for probable insurance recoveries in connection with the 2020 Zogg fire, which equals the $400 million probable loss estimate less an initial self-insured retention of $60 million, plus $30 million in legal fees incurred. Recovery under the Utility’s wildfire insurance policies for the 2021 Dixie fire will reduce the amount of insurance proceeds available for the 2020 Zogg fire by the same amount up to $600 million and vice versa. 2021 Dixie Fire According to the Cal Fire Investigation Report on the 2021 Dixie fire (the “Cal Fire Investigation Report”), on July 13, 2021, at approximately 5:07 p.m. Pacific Time, a wildfire began in the Feather River Canyon near Cresta Dam (the “2021 Dixie fire”), located in the service area of the Utility. According to the Cal Fire Investigation Report, the 2021 Dixie fire consumed 963,309 acres and resulted in 1,311 structures destroyed and 94 structures damaged (including 763 residential homes, 12 multi-family homes, 8 commercial residential homes, 148 nonresidential commercial structures, and 466 detached structures), and four first-responder injuries. The Cal Fire Investigation Report does not attribute a fatality that was previously published in an October 25, 2021 Cal Fire incident report to the 2021 Dixie fire. On January 4, 2022, Cal Fire issued a press release with its determination that the 2021 Dixie fire was caused by a tree contacting electrical distribution lines owned and operated by the Utility. On June 7, 2022, the Utility received a copy of the Cal Fire Investigation Report, which states that the fire ignited when a tree fell and contacted electrical distribution lines owned and operated by the Utility, and the Cal Fire Investigation Report has been made publicly available. The Cal Fire Investigation Report alleges that the Utility acted negligently in its response to the initial outage and fault that caused the 2021 Dixie fire. The Cal Fire Investigation Report also alleges that the subject tree had visible outward signs of damage and decay which would have been noticeable at the ground level, and that a brief visual inspection should have discovered the decay. Based on the information currently available to the Utility, including its inspection records, operating and inspection protocols and procedures, implementation of those protocols and procedures, and day-of-event response, the Utility believes its personnel acted reasonably (within the meaning of the applicable prudency standard discussed under “Regulatory Recovery” below) given the information available at the time and followed applicable policies and protocols both before ignition and in the day-of-event response. While an intervenor in a future cost recovery proceeding may argue the Cal Fire Investigation Report itself creates serious doubt with respect to the reasonableness of the Utility’s conduct, PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not believe the report identifies sufficient facts to shift the burden of proof applicable in a proceeding for cost recovery to the Utility. (See “Regulatory Recovery” and “Wildfire Fund under AB 1054”). PG&E Corporation and the Utility disagree with many allegations in the Cal Fire Investigation Report and plan to vigorously contest them. However, if the CPUC or the FERC were to reach conclusions similar to those of the Cal Fire Investigation Report, it may determine that the Utility had been imprudent, in which case some or all of its costs recorded to the WEMA would not be recoverable, the Utility would not be able to recover costs through FERC TO rates, or the Utility would be required to reimburse the Wildfire Fund for the costs and expenses that are allocated to it. The District Attorneys’ Offices of Butte County, Plumas County, Shasta County, Lassen County and Tehama County (the “North State Counties”), as well as the SED and OEIS, have been investigating the fire; various other entities, which may include other state and federal law enforcement agencies, may also be investigating the fire. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of California issued a subpoena for documents as well. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are cooperating with the investigations. Except for the investigation by the District Attorneys of the North State Counties, it is uncertain when any other such investigations will be complete. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are also conducting their own investigation into the cause of the 2021 Dixie fire. This investigation is ongoing. On April 11, 2022, the Utility and the District Attorneys of the North State Counties filed a civil stipulated judgment to permanently resolve any potential state criminal prosecution of the Utility in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire (the “Dixie Stipulation”) without the Utility admitting any liability, and the court entered the judgment on that same date. Subject to the terms and conditions of the Dixie Stipulation, the Utility will pay a total of $34.75 million, which will not be recoverable through rates. Pursuant to the Dixie Stipulation, the Utility has also agreed to: (i) fill at least 80 new internal employee positions headquartered in or serving the North State Counties; (ii) take certain other wildfire mitigation actions consistent with its WMP; (iii) engage an independent compliance monitor for five years to monitor the Utility’s compliance with certain commitments under the Dixie Stipulation, including its commitments to carry out vegetation management and equipment inspections in the North State Counties consistent with its WMP; (iv) take good faith steps to initiate mediations with certain commercial timber landowners; and (v) initiate an expedited compensation program under which individuals whose homes, including mobile homes, were destroyed by the 2021 Dixie fire can submit an electronic claim form and supporting documentation, and the Utility will make them an offer to resolve their loss based on an objective, pre-determined valuation framework. The Dixie Stipulation also permanently resolved any potential state criminal prosecution of the Utility in connection with the 2021 Fly fire, which merged with the 2021 Dixie fire. In the first quarter of 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded $34.75 million within Other current liabilities and Other noncurrent liabilities in connection with the Dixie Stipulation. As of December 31, 2022, $30.75 million has been paid pursuant to the Dixie Stipulation. On January 17, 2023, PG&E Corporation and the Utility reached an agreement with certain public entities to settle their claims for $24 million. As of February 16, 2023, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of approximately 81 complaints on behalf of at least 2,094 plaintiffs related to the 2021 Dixie fire and expect that they may receive further such complaints. The plaintiffs seek damages that include property damage, economic loss, punitive damages, exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees and other damages. On February 2, 2023, the court vacated the prior trial date and continued it to August 28, 2023. PG&E Corporation and the Utility expect to enter into an agreement with the insurance subrogation plaintiffs in the 2021 Dixie fire litigation to resolve their claims arising from the 2021 Dixie fire. Based on the current state of the law concerning inverse condemnation in California and the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including Cal Fire’s determination of the cause and the information gathered as part of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s investigation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe it is probable that they will incur a loss in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire. PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $1.15 billion as of the year ended December 31, 2021 (before available recoveries). As a result of the public entities settlement, the aggregate liability increased to $1.175 billion as of December 31, 2022. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s accrued estimated losses of $1.175 billion represent only claims based on the doctrine of inverse condemnation and do not include, among other things: (i) any amounts for potential penalties or fines that may be imposed by courts or other governmental entities on PG&E Corporation or the Utility, (ii) any punitive damages, (iii) any amounts in respect of compensation claims by federal or state agencies including for state or federal fire suppression costs and damages related to federal land, (iv) evacuation costs, or (v) any other amounts that are not reasonably estimable. As noted above, the aggregate estimated liability for claims in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire does not include potential claims for fire suppression costs from federal, state, county, or local agencies or damage to land and vegetation in national parks or national forests. As to these damages, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have not concluded that a loss is probable. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to reasonably estimate the range of possible losses for any such claims due to, among other factors, incomplete information as to facts pertinent to potential claims and defenses, as well as facts that would bear on the amount, type, and valuation of vegetation loss, potential reforestation, habitat loss, and other resources damaged or destroyed by the 2021 Dixie fire. PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe, however, that such losses could be significant with respect to fire suppression costs due to the size and duration of the 2021 Dixie fire and corresponding magnitude of fire suppression resources dedicated to fighting the 2021 Dixie fire and with respect to claims for damage to land and vegetation in national parks or national forests due to the very large number of acres of national park and national forests that were affected by the 2021 Dixie fire. According to the Cal Fire Investigation Report, over $650 million of costs had been incurred in suppressing the 2021 Dixie fire. The Utility estimates that the fire burned approximately 70,000 acres of national parks and approximately 685,000 acres of national forests. The following table presents changes in the lower end of the range of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s reasonably estimable range of losses for claims arising from the 2021 Dixie fire since December 31, 2021.
Loss Accrual (in millions) |
Balance at December 31, 2021 | $ | 1,150 |
Accrued Losses | 25 |
Payments | (44) |
Balance at December 31, 2022 | $ | 1,131 |
The Utility has liability insurance coverage for third-party liability in an aggregate amount of $900 million. Recovery under the Utility’s wildfire insurance policies for the 2020 Zogg fire will reduce the amount of insurance proceeds available for the 2021 Dixie fire by the same amount up to $600 million and vice versa. As of December 31, 2022, the Utility recorded an insurance receivable of $530 million for probable insurance recoveries in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire, which equals the aggregate $900 million of available insurance coverage for third-party liability attributable to the 2021 Dixie fire, less the $370 million insurance receivable recorded in connection with the 2020 Zogg fire. As of December 31, 2022, the Utility recorded a Wildfire Fund receivable of $175 million for probable recoveries in connection with the 2021 Dixie fire. AB 1054 provides that the CPUC may allocate costs and expenses in the application for cost recovery in full or in part taking into account factors both within and beyond the utility’s control that may have exacerbated the costs and expenses, including humidity, temperature, and winds. PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe that, even if it found that the Utility acted unreasonably, the CPUC would nevertheless authorize recovery in part. See “Wildfire Fund under AB 1054” below. The Utility also recorded a $115 million reduction to its regulatory liability for wildfire-related claims costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the FERC TO formula rate and a $388 million regulatory asset for costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the WEMA. See “Regulatory Recovery” below. Decreases in the amount of the insurance receivable for the 2021 Dixie fire may also increase the amount that is probable of recovery through the FERC TO formula rate and the WEMA. The WEMA regulatory asset increased by $41 million during the year ended December 31, 2022. 2022 Mosquito Fire On September 6, 2022, at approximately 6:17 p.m. Pacific Time, the Utility was notified that a wildfire had ignited near OxBow Reservoir in Placer County, California (the “2022 Mosquito fire”), located in the service area of the Utility. The National Wildfire Coordinating Group’s InciWeb incident overview dated November 4, 2022 at 6:30 p.m. Pacific Time indicated that the 2022 Mosquito fire had consumed approximately 76,788 acres at that time. It also indicated no fatalities, no injuries, 13 structures damaged, and 78 structures destroyed and that the fire was 100% contained. The USFS has indicated to the Utility an initial assessment that the fire started in the area of the Utility’s power line on National Forest System lands and that the USFS is conducting a criminal investigation into the 2022 Mosquito fire. On September 24, 2022, the USFS removed and took possession of one of the Utility’s transmission poles and attached equipment. The USFS has not issued a determination as to the cause. The cause of the 2022 Mosquito fire remains under investigation by the USFS and the DOJ, and PG&E Corporation and the Utility are cooperating with the investigation. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have received document and information requests from the DOJ. It is uncertain when any such investigations will be complete. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are also conducting their own investigation into the cause of the 2022 Mosquito fire. This investigation is preliminary, and PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not currently have access to the evidence in the possession of the USFS, the DOJ, or other third parties. The CPUC and other entities may also be investigating the 2022 Mosquito fire. It is uncertain when any such investigations will be complete. As of February 16, 2023, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are aware of approximately six complaints on behalf of at least 236 individual plaintiffs related to the 2022 Mosquito fire and expect that they may receive further such complaints. PG&E Corporation and the Utility also are aware of a complaint on behalf of the Placer County Water Agency and a complaint on behalf of El Dorado County, Placer County, Georgetown Divide Public Utility District, Georgetown Fire Protection District, and El Dorado County Water Agency. The plaintiffs seek damages that include property damage, economic loss, punitive damages, exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees and other damages. Based on the current state of the law concerning inverse condemnation in California and the facts and circumstances available to PG&E Corporation and the Utility as of the date of this filing, including the information gathered as part of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s investigation, PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe it is probable that they will incur a loss in connection with the 2022 Mosquito fire. PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $100 million during the quarter ended September 30, 2022 (before available recoveries). The aggregate liability remained unchanged as of December 31, 2022. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s accrued estimated losses represent only claims based on the doctrine of inverse condemnation and do not include, among other things: (i) any amounts for potential penalties or fines that may be imposed by courts or other governmental entities on PG&E Corporation or the Utility, (ii) any punitive damages, (iii) any amounts in respect of compensation claims by federal or state agencies including for state or federal fire suppression costs and damages related to federal land, (iv) evacuation costs, or (v) any other amounts that are not reasonably estimable. The Utility’s accrued estimated losses also do not include any assumptions regarding offsetting recoveries from third-parties (outside of the Utility’s insurers). As noted above, the aggregate estimated liability for claims in connection with the 2022 Mosquito fire does not include potential claims for fire suppression costs from federal, state, county, or local agencies or damage to land and vegetation in national parks or national forests. As to these damages, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have not concluded that a loss is probable. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to reasonably estimate the range of possible losses for any such claims due to, among other factors, incomplete information as to facts pertinent to potential claims and defenses, as well as facts that would bear on the amount, type, and valuation of vegetation loss, potential reforestation, habitat loss, and other resources damaged or destroyed by the 2022 Mosquito fire. The Utility has liability insurance coverage for third-party liability in an aggregate amount of $940 million, with a deductible of $60 million. As of December 31, 2022, the Utility recorded an insurance receivable of $45 million for probable insurance recoveries in connection with the 2022 Mosquito fire. As of December 31, 2022, the Utility also recorded a $10 million reduction to its regulatory liability for wildfire-related claims costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the FERC TO formula rate and a $50 million regulatory asset for costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the WEMA. See “Regulatory Recovery” below. Loss Recoveries PG&E Corporation and the Utility have recovery mechanisms available for wildfire liabilities including from insurance, customers, and the Wildfire Fund. PG&E Corporation and the Utility record a receivable for a recovery when it is deemed probable that recovery of a recorded loss will occur, and the Utility can reasonably estimate the amount or its range. While the Utility plans to seek recovery of all insured losses, it is unable to predict the ultimate amount and timing of such recoveries. For more information on the applicable facts and circumstances of the corresponding wildfires, see “2019 Kincade Fire,” “2020 Zogg Fire,” “2021 Dixie Fire,” and “2022 Mosquito Fire.” Total probable recoveries for the 2021 Dixie fire and the 2022 Mosquito fire as of December 31, 2022 are:
Potential Recovery Source (in millions) | 2022 Mosquito fire |  | 2021 Dixie fire
Insurance | $ | 45 |  |  | $ | 530 |
FERC TO rates | 10 |  |  | 115
WEMA | 50 |  |  | 388 |
Wildfire Fund | — |  |  | 175 |
Probable recoveries at December 31, 2022 | $ | 105 |  |  | $ | 1,208 |
The Utility could be subject to significant liability in connection with these wildfire events. If such liability is not recoverable from insurance or the other mechanisms described in this section, it could have a material impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. Insurance Insurance Coverage In April 2022, the Utility purchased approximately $340 million in wildfire liability insurance coverage for the period from April 1, 2022 to April 1, 2023, at a cost of approximately $263 million. Additionally, the Utility purchased approximately $600 million in wildfire liability insurance in August 2022 for the period from August 1, 2022 to August 1, 2023, at a cost of approximately $516 million. The Utility’s wildfire liability insurance is subject to an initial self-insured retention of $60 million. In April 2022, the Utility purchased approximately $725 million in non-wildfire liability coverage for the period from April 1, 2022 to April 1, 2023 at a cost of approximately $154 million. The Utility’s non-wildfire liability insurance is subject to an initial self-insured retention of $10 million. As of December 31, 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility had prepaid insurance of $424 million, reflected in Other current assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Various coverage limitations applicable to different insurance layers could result in material uninsured costs in the future depending on the amount and type of damages resulting from covered events. In the Utility’s 2020 GRC proceeding, the CPUC also approved a settlement agreement provision that allows the Utility to recover annual insurance costs for up to $1.4 billion in excess liability insurance coverage. For more information about the RTBA, see Note 4 above. Insurance Receivable Through December 31, 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded $430 million, $370 million, $530 million, and $45 million for probable insurance recoveries in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire, the 2020 Zogg fire, the 2021 Dixie fire, and the 2022 Mosquito fire, respectively. PG&E Corporation and the Utility intend to seek full recovery for all insured losses. The balances for insurance receivables with respect to wildfires are included in Other accounts receivable in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Consolidated Balance Sheets:
Insurance Receivable (in millions) | 2022 Mosquito fire |  | 2021 Dixie fire |  | 2020 Zogg fire |  | 2019 Kincade fire |  | Total
Balance at December 31, 2021 | $ | — |  |  | $ | 563 |  |  | $ | 270 |  |  | $ | 414 |  |  | $ | 1,247 |
Accrued insurance recoveries (1) | 45 |  |  | (33) |  |  | 33 |  |  | — |  |  | 45 |
Reimbursements | — |  |  | — |  |  | (185) |  |  | (313) |  |  | (498) |
Balance at December 31, 2022 | $ | 45 |  |  | $ | 530 |  |  | $ | 118 |  |  | $ | 101 |  |  | $ | 794 |
(1) For the year ended December 31, 2022, the accrued insurance recoveries decreased for the 2021 Dixie fire with a corresponding increase to the 2020 Zogg fire for $33 million. During the year ended December 31, 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility resolved property related claims in the amount of $418 million, net of self-insured retention, of which approximately $13 million is reflected in Accounts receivable, other on the Consolidated Financial Statements (excluded from the table above). Regulatory Recovery Section 451.1 of the Public Utilities Code provides that when determining an application to recover costs and expenses arising from a covered wildfire, the CPUC shall allow cost recovery if the costs and expenses are just and reasonable (i.e., the “prudency standard”). AB 1054 states that a utility with a valid safety certification for the time period in which a covered wildfire ignited “shall be deemed to have been reasonable” unless “a party to the proceeding creates a serious doubt as to the reasonableness of the [Utility’s] conduct,” in which case the burden shifts to the utility to prove its conduct was reasonable. The Utility had a valid safety certification at the time of the 2021 Dixie fire and the 2022 Mosquito fire, so any analysis of cost recovery starts with this presumption. AB 1054 also allows the CPUC to allocate costs and expenses “in full or in part taking into account factors both within and beyond the Utility’s control that may have exacerbated the costs and expenses, including humidity, temperature, and winds.” The Utility’s recorded receivables under the WEMA and with respect to the Wildfire Fund take into account this revised prudency standard and the presumption of reasonableness of the Utility’s conduct, based on the Utility’s interpretation of AB 1054 and the information currently available to the Utility. Although the concept of “serious doubt” has been applied in other regulatory proceedings, such as FERC proceedings, the revised prudency standard under AB 1054 has not been interpreted or applied by the CPUC and it is possible that the CPUC could interpret or apply the standard differently, in which case the Utility may not be able to recover all or a portion of expenses that it has recorded as a receivable. FERC TO rates The Utility recognizes income and reduces its regulatory liability for potential refund through future FERC TO formula rates for a portion of the third-party wildfire-related claims in excess of insurance coverage. The FERC presumes that a utility’s expenditures are prudent and permits cost recovery unless a party raises a serious doubt regarding the prudency of such costs. The allocation to transmission customers was based on a FERC-approved allocation factor as determined in the formula rate. Based on information currently available to the Utility regarding the 2021 Dixie fire and the 2022 Mosquito fire, as of December 31, 2022, the Utility recorded reductions of $115 million and $10 million, respectively, to its regulatory liability for wildfire-related claims costs that were determined to be probable of recovery through the FERC TO formula rate. WEMA The WEMA provides for tracking of incremental wildfire claims, outside legal costs, and insurance premiums above those authorized in rates. With respect to wildfire claims and outside legal costs, the Utility expects that the same prudency standard as applies to the Wildfire Fund would also be applied in any CPUC review of an application filed by the Utility seeking recovery of such costs recorded to the WEMA. See “Wildfire Fund under AB 1054” below. As of December 31, 2022, based on information currently available to the Utility, incremental wildfire claims-related costs for the 2021 Dixie fire and the 2022 Mosquito fire were determined to be probable of recovery and the Utility recorded $388 million and $50 million, respectively, as regulatory assets in the WEMA. Cost recovery for incremental insurance premiums is addressed through balancing account mechanisms. Wildfire Fund under AB 1054 On July 12, 2019, the California governor signed into law AB 1054, a bill which provides for the establishment of a statewide fund that will be available for eligible electric utility companies to pay eligible claims for liabilities arising from wildfires occurring after July 12, 2019 that are caused by the applicable electric utility company’s equipment, subject to the terms and conditions of AB 1054. Each of California’s large electric IOUs has elected to participate in the Wildfire Fund. Eligible claims are claims for third-party damages resulting from any such wildfires, limited to the portion of such claims that exceeds the greater of (i) $1.0 billion in the aggregate in any Coverage Year and (ii) the amount of insurance coverage required to be in place for the electric utility company pursuant to Section 3293 of the Public Utilities Code, added by AB 1054. The accrued Wildfire Fund receivable as of December 31, 2022 reflects an expectation that the Coverage Year will be based on the calendar year. Electric utility companies that draw from the Wildfire Fund will only be required to reimburse amounts that are determined by the CPUC in a proceeding for cost recovery not to be just and reasonable, applying the prudency standard in AB 1054 and after allocating costs and expenses for cost recovery based on relevant factors both within and outside of a utility’s control that may have exacerbated the costs and expenses, subject to a disallowance cap equal to 20% of the IOU’s transmission and distribution equity rate base. For the Utility, the disallowance cap would be approximately $3.0 billion based on its 2022 equity rate base, which is subject to adjustment based on changes in the Utility’s total transmission and distribution equity rate base and would apply for a three calendar-year period. The disallowance cap is inapplicable in certain circumstances, including if the Wildfire Fund administrator determines that the electric utility company’s actions or inactions that resulted in the applicable wildfire constituted “conscious or willful disregard for the rights and safety of others,” or the electric utility company failed to maintain a valid safety certification. Costs that the CPUC determines to be just and reasonable in accordance with the prudency standard in AB 1054 will not be reimbursed to the Wildfire Fund, resulting in a draw-down of the Wildfire Fund. Before the expiration of any current safety certification, the Utility must request a new safety certification from the OEIS, which the Utility expects to be issued within 90 days if the Utility has provided documentation that it has satisfied the requirements for the safety certification pursuant to Section 8389(e) of the Public Utilities Code, added by AB 1054. An issued safety certification is valid for 12 months or until a timely request for a new safety certification is acted upon, whichever occurs later. The safety certification is separate from the CPUC’s enforcement authority and does not preclude the CPUC from pursuing remedies for safety or other applicable violations. On December 13, 2022, OEIS approved the Utility’s 2022 application and issued the Utility’s 2022 safety certification. The Wildfire Fund and disallowance cap will be terminated when the amounts therein are exhausted. The Wildfire Fund is expected to be capitalized with (i) $10.5 billion of proceeds of bonds supported by a 15-year extension of the DWR charge to customers, (ii) $7.5 billion in initial contributions from California’s three large electric IOUs and (iii) $300 million in annual contributions paid by California’s three large electric IOUs for a 10-year period. The Wildfire Fund will only be available for payment of eligible claims so long as there are sufficient funds remaining in the Wildfire Fund. Such funds could be depleted more quickly than expected, including as a result of claims made by California’s other participating electric utility companies. The Wildfire Fund is available to pay for the Utility’s eligible claims arising as of July 12, 2019, the effective date of AB 1054, subject to a limit of 40% of the allowed amount of such claims arising between the effective date of AB 1054 and the Utility’s emergence from Chapter 11. The 40% limit does not apply to eligible claims that arise after the Utility’s emergence from Chapter 11. As of December 31, 2022, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded $175 million in Other noncurrent assets for Wildfire Fund receivables related to the 2021 Dixie fire. For more information see Note 3 above. Wildfire-Related Securities Claims, Fire Victim Trust D&O Claims and Related Insurance Recoveries Overview As further described under the headings “Wildfire-Related Securities Class Action” and “Wildfire-Related Securities Claims—Claims in the Bankruptcy Court Process,” PG&E Corporation and the Utility face certain wildfire-related securities claims related to the 2017 Northern California wildfires and other claims related to the 2018 Camp fire and the PSPS program in the Chapter 11 Cases (i.e., the Subordinated Claims), and certain former directors, current and former officers, and underwriters of certain note offerings face wildfire-related securities claims in the District Court action. These securities claims are collectively referred to in this section as the “Wildfire-Related Securities Claims.” Based on discussions with certain holders of Wildfire-Related Securities Claims, as well as the terms of the FVT D&O Claims Settlement Agreement (as defined below) and the settlement agreements with certain carriers of the D&O Insurance policies, PG&E Corporation believes it is probable that it will incur a loss in connection with the Wildfire-Related Securities Claims. As of December 31, 2022 and each as further described below: •For the Wildfire-Related Securities Claims, based on discussions with the plaintiffs in the consolidated securities action, PG&E Corporation recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $300 million (before available insurance), which represents its best estimate of probable losses for such claims, though actual losses could be greater or less than this estimate. •For the Insurance Coverage Claims, PG&E Corporation entered into agreements with certain of its D&O Insurance carriers to settle the majority of the Insurance Coverage Claims and has received the full settlement amount of $272 million. •For the Fire Victim Trust D&O Claims, the parties entered into a settlement agreement (the “FVT D&O Claims Settlement Agreement”) pursuant to which PG&E Corporation, the Utility, and certain former director and officer defendants paid $117 million to the Fire Victim Trust from D&O insurance policy proceeds. PG&E Corporation intends to apply the remaining proceeds to the Wildfire-Related Securities Claims. As a result, PG&E Corporation believes it is probable that it will incur a net loss of $145 million in connection with these matters. As of December 31, 2022, the net loss is reflected in Other income (expense), net on PG&E Corporation’s Consolidated Statements of Income. In the event that one or more of the settlements in these matters does not become effective, some or all parties are expected to continue to litigate, and at least some of the amounts of PG&E Corporation’s expected liabilities will remain uncertain. Wildfire-Related Derivative Litigation Two purported derivative lawsuits alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duties and unjust enrichment were filed in the San Francisco County Superior Court on November 16, 2017 and November 20, 2017, respectively, naming as defendants certain then-current and former members of the boards of directors and certain then-current and former officers of PG&E Corporation and the Utility. PG&E Corporation and the Utility were named as nominal defendants. These lawsuits were consolidated by the court on February 14, 2018 and denominated In Re California North Bay Fire Derivative Litigation (now re-captioned Trotter v. Williams et al.). On April 13, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint. On January 28, 2019, this matter was automatically stayed by PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s rights with respect to PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s claims, if any, directly or indirectly related to any of the Fires (as defined in the Plan) against former officers and directors of PG&E Corporation and the Utility were assigned to the Fire Victim Trust under the Plan (the “Fire Victim Trust D&O Claims”). Any such recovery was limited to the extent of any D&O Insurance policy proceeds paid by any insurance carrier on behalf of PG&E Corporation or the Utility for amounts owed pursuant to their indemnification obligations in connection with such causes of action. On March 8, 2021, the court granted a stipulation by the parties to substitute the trustee for the Fire Victim Trust as the plaintiff. On December 24, 2018, a separate derivative lawsuit, entitled Bowlinger v. Chew, et al. (now captioned Trotter v. Chew, et al.), was filed in San Francisco Superior Court, alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, corporate waste, and unjust enrichment in connection with the 2018 Camp fire against certain then-current and former officers and directors, and naming PG&E Corporation and the Utility as nominal defendants. On November 5, 2020, the court entered a stipulation and order to substitute the trustee for the Fire Victim Trust as the plaintiff. On February 24, 2021, the trustee filed an amended complaint in the Trotter v. Chew action, asserting two direct claims for breach of fiduciary duty against certain of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s former directors and officers. Neither PG&E Corporation nor the Utility was a party to the action. On March 30, 2021, the Trotter v. Chew and Trotter v. Williams actions were consolidated. On April 26, 2021, the defendants filed demurrers to the amended complaint, which the court sustained in part and overruled in part on November 8, 2021. On November 18, 2021, the trustee filed a second amended complaint. On December 21, 2021, the defendants filed demurrers to the second amended complaint, which the court overruled. On March 10, 2022, the defendants filed motions for summary judgment. On July 26, 2022, PG&E Corporation, the Utility, certain former director and officer defendants, and the Fire Victim Trust entered into the FVT D&O Claims Settlement Agreement, pursuant to which PG&E Corporation, the Utility, and certain former director and officer defendants paid $117 million to the Fire Victim Trust from D&O Insurance policy proceeds, and in return, the Fire Victim Trust released, among other things, any claims related to the assigned claims and the pursuit of the Trotter v. Chew action. Pursuant to the Plan, the settlement was paid solely from the insurance proceeds from the “Side B” D&O Insurance coverage. As a result of the FVT D&O Claims Settlement Agreement, the Trotter v. Chew action was dismissed with prejudice on December 29, 2022. On January 25, 2019, a separate purported derivative lawsuit, entitled Hagberg v. Chew, et al., was filed in San Francisco Superior Court, alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, corporate waste, and unjust enrichment in connection with the 2018 Camp fire against certain then-current and former officers and directors, and naming PG&E Corporation and the Utility as nominal defendants. The plaintiff filed a request to dismiss this action, and on October 12, 2022, the court dismissed the action. Securities Class Action Litigation Wildfire-Related Securities Class Action In June 2018, two purported securities class actions were filed in the District Court, naming PG&E Corporation and certain of its then-current and former officers as defendants, entitled David C. Weston v. PG&E Corporation, et al. and Jon Paul Moretti v. PG&E Corporation, et al., respectively. The complaints alleged material misrepresentations and omissions in various PG&E Corporation public disclosures related to, among other things, vegetation management and other issues connected to the 2017 Northern California wildfires. The complaints asserted claims under Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and sought unspecified monetary relief, interest, attorneys’ fees and other costs. Both complaints identified a proposed class period of April 29, 2015 to June 8, 2018. On September 10, 2018, the court consolidated both cases, and the litigation is now denominated In re PG&E Corporation Securities Litigation, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 18-03509. The court also appointed PERA as lead plaintiff. PERA filed a consolidated amended complaint on November 9, 2018. On December 14, 2018, PERA filed a second amended consolidated complaint to add allegations regarding the 2018 Camp fire, including allegations regarding transmission line safety and the PSPS program. Due to the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases, the proceedings were automatically stayed as to PG&E Corporation and the Utility. On February 22, 2019, a third purported securities class action was filed in the District Court, entitled York County on behalf of the York County Retirement Fund, et al. v. Rambo, et al. (the “York County Action”). The complaint named as defendants certain then-current and former officers and directors, as well as the underwriters of four public offerings of notes from 2016 to 2018. Neither PG&E Corporation nor the Utility was named as a defendant. The complaint asserted claims under Section 11 of the Securities Act based on alleged material misrepresentations and omissions in connection with the note offerings related to, among other things, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s vegetation management and wildfire safety measures. On May 7, 2019, the York County Action was consolidated with In re PG&E Corporation Securities Litigation. On May 28, 2019, the plaintiffs in the consolidated securities actions filed a third amended consolidated class action complaint, which includes the claims asserted in the previously filed actions and names as defendants PG&E Corporation, the Utility, certain current and former officers and former directors, and the underwriters. On August 28, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court denied PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s request to extend the stay to the claims against the officer, director, and underwriter defendants. On October 4, 2019, the officer, director, and underwriter defendants filed motions to dismiss the third amended complaint, which motions are under submission with the District Court. On September 30, 2022, the District Court issued an order staying the action pending resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings. Accordingly, the District Court administratively closed the case, subject to a motion by the parties thereto to reopen the case. On October 31, 2022, PERA filed a notice of appeal of the District Court’s order staying the action. PERA’s opening brief for the appeal is due March 6, 2023, and the answering brief is due April 5, 2023. Based on discussions with the plaintiffs in this matter, PG&E Corporation believes it is probable that it will incur a loss in connection with this matter. In the second quarter of 2022, PG&E Corporation recorded a liability in the aggregate amount of $300 million (before available insurance), which represents its best estimate of probable losses for the Wildfire-Related Securities Claims. PG&E Corporation believes that it is reasonably possible that the amount of loss could be greater or less than the accrued estimated amount but is unable to reasonably estimate any additional loss because the amount of the liability has not been agreed or otherwise determined, and even if PG&E Corporation were to enter into an agreement with representatives of the plaintiffs in this matter (which would also resolve proofs of claim by these plaintiffs in the bankruptcy), any such agreement would be subject to, among other things, approval by the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court, and class members would have the right to opt out of any such agreement. Wildfire-Related Securities Claims—Claims in the Bankruptcy Court Process PG&E Corporation and the Utility intend to resolve claims filed in the bankruptcy relating to, among others, the three purported securities class actions (described above) that have been consolidated and denominated In re PG&E Corporation Securities Litigation, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 18-03509, pursuant to the Plan. As described above, these claims consist of pre-petition claims under the federal securities laws related to, among other things, allegedly misleading statements or omissions with respect to vegetation management and wildfire safety disclosures, and are classified into separate categories under the Plan, each of which is subject to subordination under the Bankruptcy Code. The first category of claims consists of pre-petition claims arising from or related to the common stock of PG&E Corporation (such claims, with certain other similar claims against PG&E Corporation, the “HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims”). The second category of pre-petition claims, which comprises two separate classes under the Plan, consists of claims arising from debt securities issued by PG&E Corporation and the Utility (such claims, with certain other similar claims against PG&E Corporation and the Utility, the “Subordinated Debt Claims,” and together with the HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims, the “Subordinated Claims”). While PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe they have defenses to the Subordinated Claims, as well as insurance coverage that may be available with respect to the Subordinated Claims, these defenses may not prevail and any such insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover the full amount of the allowed claims. In that case, PG&E Corporation and the Utility will be required, pursuant to the Plan, to satisfy any such allowed claims as follows: •each holder of an allowed HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claim will receive a number of shares of common stock of PG&E Corporation equal to such holder’s HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claim Share (as such term is defined in the Plan); and •each holder of an allowed Subordinated Debt Claim will receive payment in full in cash. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have engaged in settlement efforts with respect to the Subordinated Claims. If any of the Subordinated Claims are ultimately not settled, PG&E Corporation and the Utility expect that those Subordinated Claims will be resolved by the Bankruptcy Court in the claims reconciliation process and treated as described above under the Plan. Under the Plan, after the Emergence Date, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have the authority to compromise, settle, object to, or otherwise resolve proofs of claim, and the Bankruptcy Court retains jurisdiction to hear disputes arising in connection with disputed claims. With respect to the Subordinated Claims, the claims reconciliation process may include litigation of the merits of such claims, including the filing of motions, fact discovery, and expert discovery. The total number and amount of allowed Subordinated Claims, if any, was not determined at the Emergence Date. To the extent any such claims are allowed, the total amount of such claims could be material, and therefore could result in (a) the issuance of a material number of shares of common stock of PG&E Corporation with respect to allowed HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims, or (b) the payment of a material amount of cash with respect to allowed Subordinated Debt Claims. There can be no assurance that such claims will not have a material adverse impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. Further, if shares are issued in respect of allowed HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims, it may be determined that, under the Plan, the Fire Victim Trust should receive additional shares of common stock of PG&E Corporation such that it would have owned 22.19% of the outstanding common stock of reorganized PG&E Corporation on the Emergence Date, assuming that such issuance of shares in satisfaction of the HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims had occurred on the Emergence Date. On July 2, 2020, PERA filed a notice of appeal of the Confirmation Order to the District Court, solely to the extent of seeking review of that part of the Confirmation Order approving the Insurance Deduction (as defined in the Plan) with respect to the formula for the determination of the HoldCo Rescission or Damage Claims Share. On August 10, 2021, the District Court issued an order affirming the Bankruptcy Court’s ruling with respect to the Insurance Deduction. On September 9, 2021, PERA filed a notice of appeal of the District Court’s order to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and on December 15, 2021, PERA filed its opening brief. On February 14, 2022 and February 17, 2022, the Official Committee of Tort Claimants appointed in the Chapter 11 Cases and both PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed their answering briefs, respectively. On May 20, 2022, the Official Committee of Tort Claimants filed a motion to dismiss the case. On June 21, 2022, PERA filed its opposition, and PG&E Corporation and the Utility joined the motion to dismiss. On June 28, 2022, the Official Committee of Tort Claimants filed its reply. On January 13, 2023, PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed a joint motion with PERA requesting the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stay and hold PERA’s appeal in abeyance to allow the parties to continue to negotiate a settlement of the matters underlying the appeal. On January 25, 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals entered an order granting the joint motion. PERA’s appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals remains pending. On September 1, 2020, PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed a motion (the “Securities Claims Procedures Motion”) with the Bankruptcy Court to approve procedures to help facilitate the resolution of the Subordinated Claims. The motion, among other things, requested approval of procedures which would allow PG&E Corporation and the Utility to collect trading information with respect to the Subordinated Claims, to engage in an alternative dispute resolution process for resolving disputed Subordinated Claims, and to file certain omnibus claim objections with respect to the Subordinated Claims. On January 25, 2021, the Bankruptcy Court granted the Securities Claims Procedures Motion. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have worked to resolve the Subordinated Claims in accordance with the procedures approved by the Bankruptcy Court, including by collecting trading information from holders of Subordinated Claims. Also, pursuant to those procedures, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have filed numerous omnibus objections in the Bankruptcy Court to certain of the Subordinated Claims. The Bankruptcy Court has entered several orders disallowing and expunging Subordinated Claims that were subject to these omnibus objections, and certain Subordinated Claims subject to these omnibus objections remain pending. PG&E Corporation and the Utility expect to file additional omnibus objections with respect to certain of the Subordinated Claims and to continue to act under the procedures approved by the Bankruptcy Court to resolve the Subordinated Claims. Indemnification Obligations and D&O Insurance Coverage To the extent permitted by law, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have obligations to indemnify directors and officers for certain events or occurrences while a director or officer is or was serving in such capacity, which indemnification obligations may extend to the claims asserted against certain directors and officers in the securities class actions and in the litigation matters enumerated above under the heading “Wildfire-Related Derivative Litigation.” PG&E Corporation and the Utility maintain D&O Insurance coverage to reduce their exposure to such indemnification obligations. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have provided notice to their insurance carriers of the claims asserted in the litigation matters enumerated above under the headings “Wildfire-Related Securities Class Action” and “Wildfire-Related Derivative Litigation,” and are in arbitration with certain carriers regarding, among other things, the applicability of one year of D&O Insurance policies to those matters (the “Insurance Coverage Claims”). In July 2022, PG&E Corporation, the Utility, and the former director and officer defendants settled the majority of the Insurance Coverage Claims with certain of their D&O Insurance carriers. As a result of these agreements, PG&E Corporation received insurance proceeds in an aggregate amount of $272 million. Proceeds from the D&O Insurance coverage were paid to the Fire Victim Trust for the Fire Victim Trust D&O Claims, and PG&E Corporation intends to apply the remaining proceeds to the Wildfire-Related Securities Claims. PG&E Corporation and the Utility additionally have potential indemnification obligations to the underwriters for the Utility’s note offerings, pursuant to the underwriting agreements associated with those offerings. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s indemnification obligations to the officers, directors and underwriters may be limited or affected by the Chapter 11 Cases, among other things. Butte County District Attorney’s Office Investigation into the 2018 Camp Fire Following the 2018 Camp fire, the Butte County District Attorney’s Office and the California Attorney General’s Office opened a criminal investigation of the 2018 Camp fire. On March 17, 2020, the Utility entered into the Plea Agreement and Settlement (the “Plea Agreement”) with the People of the State of California, by and through the Butte County District Attorney’s Office to resolve the criminal prosecution of the Utility in connection with the 2018 Camp fire. Subject to the terms and conditions of the Plea Agreement, the Utility pleaded guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter in violation of Penal Code section 192(b) and one count of unlawfully causing a fire in violation of Penal Code section 452, and to admit special allegations pursuant to Penal Code sections 452.1(a)(2), 452.1(a)(3) and 452.1(a)(4). On August 20, 2021, the Butte County Superior Court held a brief hearing on the status of restitution, which involves distribution of funds from the Fire Victim Trust. The Butte County Superior Court has since continued the hearing to May 19, 2023. OTHER CONTINGENCIES AND COMMITMENTSPG&E Corporation and the Utility have significant contingencies arising from their operations, including contingencies related to enforcement and litigation matters and environmental remediation. A provision for a loss contingency is recorded when it is both probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. PG&E Corporation and the Utility evaluate the range of reasonably estimated losses and record a provision based on the lower end of the range, unless an amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount. The assessment of whether a loss is probable or reasonably possible, and whether the loss or a range of loss is estimable, often involves a series of complex judgments about future events. Loss contingencies are reviewed quarterly and estimates are adjusted to reflect the impact of all known information, such as negotiations, discovery, settlements and payments, rulings, penalties related to regulatory compliance, advice of legal counsel, and other information and events pertaining to a particular matter. PG&E Corporation and the Utility exclude anticipated legal costs from the provision for loss and expense these costs as incurred. The Utility also has substantial financial commitments in connection with agreements entered into to support its operating activities. See “Purchase Commitments” below. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows may be materially affected by the outcome of the following matters.CPUC and FERC Matters Transmission Owner Rate Case Revenue Subject to Refund The FERC determines the amount of authorized revenue requirements, including the rate of return on electric transmission assets, that the Utility may collect in rates in the TO rate case. The FERC typically authorizes the Utility to charge new rates based on the requested revenue requirement, subject to refund, before the FERC has issued a final decision. The Utility bills and records revenue based on the amounts requested in its rate case filing and records a reserve for its estimate of the amounts that are probable of refund. Rates subject to refund went into effect on March 1, 2017, March 1, 2018, and May 1, 2019 for the TO rate case for 2017 (“TO18”), the TO rate case for 2018 (“TO19”), and the TO rate case for 2019 (“TO20”), respectively. On October 15, 2020, the FERC issued an order that, among other things, rejected the Utility’s direct assignment of common plant to FERC and required the allocation of all common plant between CPUC and FERC jurisdiction be based on operating and maintenance labor ratios. The order reopened the record for the limited purpose of allowing the parties an opportunity to present written evidence concerning the FERC’s revised ROE methodology adopted in FERC Opinion No. 569-A, issued on May 21, 2020. On December 17, 2020 and June 17, 2021, the FERC issued orders denying requests for rehearing submitted by the Utility and intervenors. In 2021, the Utility filed four appeals. The appeals related to two issues: (i) impact of the Tax Act on TO18 rates in January and February 2018 and (ii) aspects of the rehearing order other than the Tax Act. The appeals have been consolidated and are being held in abeyance until the FERC addresses the ROE issue on rehearing. As a result of an order denying rehearing on the common plant allocation, the Utility increased its regulatory liabilities for amounts previously collected during the TO18, TO19, and TO20 rate case periods from 2017 through the fourth quarter of 2022 by approximately $416 million. A portion of these common plant costs are expected to be recovered at the CPUC in a separate application and as a result, the Utility recorded approximately $258 million to Regulatory assets. On September 21, 2018, the Utility filed an all-party settlement with the FERC, which was approved by the FERC on December 20, 2018, in connection with TO19. As part of the settlement, the TO19 revenue requirement will be set at 98.85% of the revenue requirement for TO18 that will be determined upon issuance of a final unappealable decision in the TO18 proceeding. On December 30, 2020, the FERC approved an all-party settlement agreement in connection with TO20. The TO20 settlement resolved all issues of the Utility’s formula rate. However, some of the formula rate issues are contingent on the outcome of TO18, including the allocation of costs related to common, general and intangible plant. The settlement provides that the formula rate will remain in effect through December 31, 2023. The TO20 rate case provides that the transmission revenue requirement and rates are to be updated annually on January 1, subject to true-up. The Utility is required to make a successor rate filing in 2023, which would go into effect on January 1, 2024. Under its formula rate, the Utility submits an annual update to the FERC each December for rates to go into effect on January 1 of the following year. Parties have protested the Utility’s annual updates, and these protests are pending before the FERC. On March 17, 2022, the FERC issued a further order in the TO18 rate case proceeding finding that 9.26% is the just and reasonable base ROE for the Utility. With the incentive component of 50-basis points for the Utility’s continuing participation in the CAISO, the resulting ROE would be 9.76%. As a result, the Utility increased its regulatory liabilities for amounts previously collected during the TO18 and TO19 rate case periods from March 2017 through the first quarter of 2022 by approximately $62.5 million. On April 18, 2022, the Utility and several other parties sought rehearing of the FERC’s determination of the base ROE finding. On May 19, 2022, the FERC denied all parties’ rehearing requests. The Utility has filed an appeal in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, as have the other parties that sought rehearing. The appeal is being held in abeyance until the FERC issues a substantive order on rehearing on the ROE issue. On May 16, 2022 and May 31, 2022, the Utility filed a compliance filing and a refund report describing the adjustments made to the transmission revenue requirement, adjusted rates, and the calculation and mechanism of the refunds. The Utility expects to issue the refund after the FERC issues a decision on the compliance filing. 2022 Cost of Capital Application The Utility’s annual cost of capital adjustment mechanism provides that in any year in which the difference between (i) the average Moody’s utility bond rates (as measured in the 12-month period from October through September (the “Index”)) and (ii) 4.5% exceeds 100 basis points, the Utility’s ROE will be adjusted by one-half of such difference, and the cost of debt will be trued up to the most recent recorded cost of debt. The Utility is to initiate this adjustment mechanism by filing an advice letter on or before October 15 of the year in which the mechanism triggered, to become effective on January 1 of the next year. On August 23, 2021, the Utility filed an off-cycle 2022 cost of capital application with the CPUC based on the extraordinary event of the COVID-19 pandemic and related government response, which has decreased interest rates but has not reduced the cost of capital for electric utilities in general, and the Utility in particular, to the same extent as the overall financial markets (the “2022 cost of capital application”). The 2022 cost of capital application requested that the CPUC authorize the Utility's cost of capital for its electric generation, electric distribution, natural gas distribution, and natural gas transmission and storage rate base beginning on January 1, 2022 for 2022, 2023, and 2024. The Utility requested that the CPUC approve the Utility’s proposed ratemaking capital structure, ROE, cost of preferred stock, and cost of debt. The Utility proposed to establish a cost of long-term debt of 4.14%, a return on preferred stock of 5.52%, a ROE of 11%, and to retain the existing capital structure. In September 2021, the cost of capital adjustment mechanism was triggered because the Index was 117 basis points below the benchmark. As the 2022 cost of capital application was pending, the Utility did not file the October 15, 2021 advice letter to adjust rates. Subsequently, on October 28, 2021, the CPUC ruled that the 2022 cost of capital application did not suspend the adjustment mechanism as requested by the application. The ruling also required that the Utility comply with the cost of capital mechanism by filing the information that would have been included in the October 15, 2021 advice letter in the 2022 cost of capital application proceeding on November 8, 2021, which the Utility did. On December 17, 2021, the CPUC issued a final decision authorizing the Utility’s request to establish memorandum accounts to track revenue requirement changes beginning on January 1, 2022 and leaving the cost of capital rates at current levels, subject to true-up based on the CPUC’s decision on the 2022 cost of capital application. As of December 31, 2022, the Utility had not recorded a reserve for refunds related to these memorandum accounts. On November 3, 2022, the CPUC issued a final decision finding that an extraordinary event occurred, and that the cost of capital adjustment mechanism should not be implemented for 2022. The final decision retains the cost of capital previously authorized in the 2020 cost of capital proceeding, as adjusted, and closes this proceeding. On December 5, 2022, intervenors filed an application for rehearing. On December 20, 2022, the Utility filed a response to the application for rehearing. Other Matters PG&E Corporation and the Utility are subject to various claims and lawsuits that separately are not considered material. Accruals for contingencies related to such matters totaled $69 million and $77 million as of December 31, 2022 and December 31, 2021, respectively. These amounts were included in Other current liabilities on the Consolidated Financial Statements. PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not believe it is reasonably possible that the resolution of these matters will have a material impact on their financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. PSPS Class Action On December 19, 2019, a complaint was filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California naming PG&E Corporation and the Utility. The plaintiff seeks certification of a class consisting of all California residents and business owners who had their power shut off by the Utility during the October 9, October 23, October 26, October 28, or November 20, 2019 power outages and any subsequent voluntary outages occurring during the course of litigation. The plaintiff alleges that the necessity for the October and November 2019 power shutoff events was caused by the Utility’s negligence in failing to properly maintain its electrical lines and surrounding vegetation. The complaint seeks up to $2.5 billion in special and general damages, punitive and exemplary damages and injunctive relief to require the Utility to properly maintain and inspect its power grid. PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe the allegations are without merit and intend to defend this lawsuit vigorously. On March 30, 2020, the Bankruptcy Court granted a motion to dismiss this class action by the Utility because the plaintiff’s class action claims are preempted as a matter of law by the California Public Utilities Code. On April 3, 2020, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order dismissing the action without leave to amend. The plaintiff appealed the decision dismissing the complaint to the District Court. On March 26, 2021, the District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court’s dismissal of this action, and the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On February 28, 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals entered an order certifying two questions of state law to the California Supreme Court. On June 1, 2022, the California Supreme Court accepted certification of the questions. The plaintiff filed its opening brief on July 1, 2022. The Utility’s answering brief was filed on August 31, 2022, and the plaintiff’s reply brief was filed on October 20, 2022. The Utility is unable to determine the timing and outcome of this proceeding. CZU Lightning Complex Fire Notices of Violation Between November 2020 and January 2021, several governmental entities raised concerns regarding the Utility’s emergency response to the 2020 CZU Lightning Complex fire, including Cal Fire, the California Coastal Commission, the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors alleging environmental, vegetation management, and unpermitted work violations. In the matter of Santa Cruz County’s complaint with the CPUC, the parties reached a settlement, and the CPUC dismissed the complaint on December 15, 2021. The Utility continues to work with the California Coastal Commission, Cal Fire, and the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board to resolve any outstanding issues and to work with Santa Cruz County to implement the terms of the settlement agreement. Violations can result in penalties, remediation, and other relief. Based on the information available, PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe it is probable that a liability has been incurred. Accordingly, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recorded charges during the fourth quarters of 2021 and 2022, each for an amount that is not material. PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not believe that the resolution of these matters will have a material impact on their financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Environmental Remediation Contingencies Given the complexities of the legal and regulatory environment and the inherent uncertainties involved in the early stages of a remediation project, the process for estimating remediation liabilities requires significant judgment. The Utility records an environmental remediation liability when the site assessments indicate that remediation is probable, and the Utility can reasonably estimate the loss or a range of probable amounts. The Utility records an environmental remediation liability based on the lower end of the range of estimated probable costs, unless an amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount. Key factors that inform the development of estimated costs include site feasibility studies and investigations, applicable remediation actions, operations and maintenance activities, post-remediation monitoring, and the cost of technologies that are expected to be approved to remediate the site. Amounts recorded are not discounted to their present value. The Utility’s environmental remediation liability is primarily included in non-current liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and is comprised of the following:
| Balance at
(in millions) | December 31, 2022 |  | December 31, 2021
Topock natural gas compressor station | $ | 284 |  |  | $ | 299 |
Hinkley natural gas compressor station | 110 |  |  | 123 |
Former MGP sites owned by the Utility or third parties (1) | 750 |  |  | 667 |
Utility-owned generation facilities (other than fossil fuel-fired), other facilities, and third-party disposal sites (2) | 112 |  |  | 104 |
Fossil fuel-fired generation facilities and sites (3) | 26 |  |  | 70 |
Total environmental remediation liability | $ | 1,282 |  |  | $ | 1,263 |
(1) Primarily driven by the following sites: San Francisco Beach Street, Vallejo, Napa, and San Francisco East Harbor. (2) Primarily driven by geothermal landfill and Shell Pond site. (3) Primarily driven by the San Francisco Potrero Power Plant. The Utility’s gas compressor stations, former MGP sites, power plant sites, gas gathering sites, and sites used by the Utility for the storage, recycling, and disposal of potentially hazardous substances are subject to requirements issued by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act in addition to other state laws relating to hazardous substances. The Utility has a comprehensive program to comply with federal, state, and local laws and regulations related to hazardous materials, waste, remediation activities, and other environmental requirements. The Utility assesses and monitors the environmental requirements on an ongoing basis and implements changes to its program as deemed appropriate. The Utility’s remediation activities are overseen by the DTSC, several California regional water quality control boards, and various other federal, state, and local agencies. The Utility’s environmental remediation liability as of December 31, 2022, reflects its best estimate of probable future costs for remediation based on the current assessment data and regulatory obligations. Future costs will depend on many factors, including the extent of work necessary to implement final remediation plans, the Utility’s time frame for remediation, and unanticipated claims filed against the Utility. The Utility may incur actual costs in the future that are materially different than this estimate and such costs could have a material impact on results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows during the period in which they are recorded. As of December 31, 2022, the Utility expected to recover $1.05 billion of its environmental remediation liability for certain sites through various ratemaking mechanisms authorized by the CPUC. Natural Gas Compressor Station Sites The Utility is legally responsible for remediating groundwater contamination caused by hexavalent chromium used in the past at the Utility’s natural gas compressor stations. The Utility is also required to take measures to abate the effects of the contamination on the environment. Topock Site The Utility’s remediation and abatement efforts at the Topock site are subject to the regulatory authority of the DTSC and the U.S. Department of the Interior. On April 24, 2018, the DTSC authorized the Utility to build an in-situ groundwater treatment system to convert hexavalent chromium into a non-toxic and non-soluble form of chromium. Construction activities began in October 2018, and the initial phase of construction was completed in 2021. Additional phases of construction will continue for several years. The Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with the Topock site may increase by as much as $240 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated. The costs associated with environmental remediation at the Topock site are expected to be recovered primarily through the HSMA, where 90% of the costs are recovered through rates. Hinkley Site The Utility has been implementing remediation measures at the Hinkley site to reduce the mass of the chromium plume in groundwater and to monitor and control movement of the plume. The Utility’s remediation and abatement efforts at the Hinkley site are subject to the regulatory authority of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region. In November 2015, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Lahontan Region adopted a clean-up and abatement order directing the Utility to contain and remediate the underground plume of hexavalent chromium and the potential environmental impacts. The final order states that the Utility must continue and improve its remediation efforts, define the boundaries of the chromium plume, and take other action. Additionally, the final order sets plume capture requirements, requires a monitoring and reporting program, and includes deadlines for the Utility to meet interim cleanup targets. The United States Geological Survey team is conducting a background study on the site to better define the chromium plume boundaries. A draft background report was received in January 2020 and is expected to be finalized in 2023. The Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with the Hinkley site may increase by as much as $126 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated. The costs associated with environmental remediation at the Hinkley site will not be recovered through rates. Former Manufactured Gas Plants Former MGPs used coal and oil to produce gas for use by the Utility’s customers before natural gas became available. The by-products and residues of this process were often disposed of at the MGPs themselves. The Utility has a program to manage the residues left behind as a result of the manufacturing process; many of the sites in the program have been addressed. The Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with MGP sites may increase by as much as $511 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation at identified MGP sites is greater than anticipated. The costs associated with environmental remediation at the MGP sites are recovered through the HSMA, where 90% of the costs are recovered through rates. Utility-Owned Generation Facilities and Third-Party Disposal Sites Utility-owned generation facilities and third-party disposal sites often involve long-term remediation. The Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with Utility-owned generation facilities and third-party disposal sites may increase by as much as $51 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated. The environmental remediation costs associated with the Utility-owned generation facilities and third-party disposal sites are recovered through the HSMA, where 90% of the costs are recovered through rates. Fossil Fuel-Fired Generation Sites In 1998, the Utility divested its generation power plant business as part of generation deregulation. Although the Utility sold its fossil-fueled power plants, the Utility retained the environmental remediation liability associated with each site. The Utility’s undiscounted future costs associated with fossil fuel-fired generation sites may increase by as much as $50 million if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated. The environmental remediation costs associated with the fossil fuel-fired sites will not be recovered through rates. Nuclear Insurance The Utility maintains multiple insurance policies through NEIL, a mutual insurer owned by utilities with nuclear facilities, and EMANI, covering nuclear or non-nuclear events at the Utility’s two nuclear generating units at Diablo Canyon and the retired Humboldt Bay Unit 3. NEIL provides insurance coverage for property damages and business interruption losses incurred by the Utility if a nuclear or non-nuclear event were to occur at the Utility’s two nuclear generating units at Diablo Canyon. NEIL provides property damage and business interruption coverage of up to $3.2 billion per nuclear incident and $2.5 billion per non-nuclear incident for Diablo Canyon. For Humboldt Bay Unit 3, NEIL provides up to $50 million of coverage for nuclear and non-nuclear property damages. NEIL provides coverage for damages caused by acts of terrorism at nuclear power plants. Through NEIL, there is up to $3.2 billion available to the membership to cover one or more terrorist acts occurring within a 12-month period at member sites. NEIL also provides coverage for damages caused by cyber events at nuclear power plants. Through NEIL, there is up to $3.2 billion available to the membership to cover one or more cyber events occurring within a 12-month period at member sites. These coverage amounts are shared by all NEIL members and all nuclear and non-nuclear property insurance policies issued by NEIL. In addition to the nuclear insurance the Utility maintains through NEIL, the Utility also is a member of EMANI. EMANI shares losses with NEIL as part of the first $400 million in coverage for nuclear or non-nuclear property damages. Additional coverage is procured through EMANI, which provides excess insurance coverage for property damages and business interruption losses incurred by the Utility if a nuclear or non-nuclear event were to occur at Diablo Canyon. The excess insurance coverage through EMANI provides an additional $200 million for any one accident and in the annual aggregate excess of the combined amount recoverable under the Utility’s NEIL policies. The coverage procured through EMANI also includes protection for acts of terrorism. If NEIL losses in any policy year exceed accumulated funds, the Utility could be subject to a retrospective assessment. If NEIL were to exercise this assessment, the maximum aggregate annual retrospective premium obligation for the Utility would be approximately $41 million. If EMANI losses in any policy year exceed accumulated funds, the Utility could be subject to a retrospective assessment of approximately $4 million. Under the Price-Anderson Act, public liability claims that arise from nuclear incidents that occur at Diablo Canyon, and that occur during the transportation of material to and from Diablo Canyon are limited to approximately $13.7 billion. The Utility purchases the maximum available public liability insurance of $450 million for Diablo Canyon. The balance of the $13.7 billion of liability protection is provided under a loss-sharing program among nuclear reactor owners. The Utility may be assessed up to $275 million per nuclear incident under this loss sharing program, with payments in each year limited to a maximum of $41 million per incident. Both the maximum assessment and the maximum yearly assessment are adjusted for inflation at least every five years. The Price-Anderson Act does not apply to claims that arise from nuclear incidents that occur during shipping of nuclear material from the nuclear fuel enricher to a fuel fabricator or that occur at the fuel fabricator’s facility. The Utility has a separate policy that provides coverage for claims arising from some of these incidents up to a maximum of $450 million per incident. In addition, the Utility has approximately $53 million of liability insurance for Humboldt Bay Unit 3 and has a $500 million indemnification from the NRC for public liability arising from nuclear incidents for Humboldt Bay Unit 3, covering liabilities in excess of the $53 million in liability insurance. Purchase Commitments The following table shows the undiscounted future expected obligations under power purchase agreements that have been approved by the CPUC and have met specified construction milestones as well as undiscounted future expected payment obligations for natural gas supplies, natural gas transportation, natural gas storage, and nuclear fuel as of December 31, 2022:
| Power Purchase Agreements |  |  |  |  |  |
(in millions) | Renewable Energy |  | Conventional Energy |  | Other |  | Natural Gas |  | Nuclear Fuel |  | Total
2023 | $ | 2,081 |  |  | $ | 482 |  |  | $ | 60 |  |  | $ | 1,746 |  |  | $ | 47 |  |  | $ | 4,416 |
2024 | 2,052 |  |  | 378 |  |  | 61 |  |  | 195 |  |  | 11 |  |  | 2,697 |
2025 | 2,040 |  |  | 715 |  |  | 61 |  |  | 140 |  |  | — |  |  | 2,956 |
2026 | 1,980 |  |  | 663 |  |  | 21 |  |  | 129 |  |  | — |  |  | 2,793 |
2027 | 1,919 |  |  | 579 |  |  | 7 |  |  | 53 |  |  | — |  |  | 2,558 |
Thereafter | 17,807 |  |  | 1,565 |  |  | 13 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 19,385 |
Total purchase commitments | $ | 27,879 |  |  | $ | 4,382 |  |  | $ | 223 |  |  | $ | 2,263 |  |  | $ | 58 |  |  | $ | 34,805 |
Third-Party Power Purchase Agreements In the ordinary course of business, the Utility enters into various agreements, including renewable energy agreements, QF agreements, and other power purchase agreements to purchase power and electric capacity. The price of purchased power may be fixed or variable. Variable pricing is generally based on the current market price of either natural gas or electricity at the date of delivery. Renewable Energy Power Purchase Agreements. In order to comply with California’s RPS requirements, the Utility is required to deliver renewable energy to its customers at a gradually increasing rate. The Utility has entered into various agreements to purchase renewable energy to help meet California’s requirement. The Utility’s obligations under a significant portion of these agreements are contingent on the third party’s construction of new generation facilities, which are expected to grow. These renewable energy contracts expire at various dates between 2023 and 2043. Conventional Energy Power Purchase Agreements. The Utility has entered into many power purchase agreements for conventional generation resources, which include tolling agreements and RA agreements. The Utility’s obligations under a portion of these agreements are contingent on the third parties’ development of new generation facilities to provide capacity and energy products to the Utility. These power purchase agreements expire at various dates between 2023 and 2041. Other Power Purchase Agreements. The Utility has entered into agreements to purchase energy and capacity with independent power producers that own generation facilities that meet the definition of a QF under federal law. As of December 31, 2022, QF contracts in operation expire at various dates between 2023 and 2041. In addition, the Utility has agreements with various irrigation districts and water agencies to purchase hydroelectric power. The net costs incurred for all power purchases and electric capacity were $2.8 billion in 2022, $3.0 billion in 2021, and $2.9 billion in 2020. Natural Gas Supply, Transportation, and Storage Commitments The Utility purchases natural gas directly from producers and marketers in both Canada and the United States to serve its core customers and to fuel its owned-generation facilities. The Utility also contracts for natural gas transportation from the points at which the Utility takes delivery (typically in Canada, the United States Rocky Mountain supply area, and the southwestern United States) to the points at which the Utility’s natural gas transportation system begins. These agreements expire at various dates between 2023 and 2041. In addition, the Utility has contracted for natural gas storage services in Northern California to more reliably meet customers’ loads. Costs incurred for natural gas purchases, natural gas transportation services, and natural gas storage, which include contracts with terms of less than 1 year, were $2.4 billion in 2022, $1.2 billion in 2021, and $0.8 billion in 2020. Nuclear Fuel Agreements The Utility has entered into several purchase agreements for nuclear fuel. These agreements expire at various dates between 2023 and 2024 and are intended to ensure long-term nuclear fuel supply. The Utility relies on a number of international producers of nuclear fuel in order to diversify its sources and provide security of supply. Pricing terms are also diversified, ranging from market-based prices to base prices that are escalated using published indices. Payments for nuclear fuel were $44 million in 2022, $79 million in 2021, and $111 million in 2020. Other Commitments PG&E Corporation and the Utility have other commitments primarily related to office facilities and land leases, which expire at various dates between 2023 and 2057. At December 31, 2022, the future minimum payments related to these commitments were as follows:
(in millions) | Other Commitments
2023 | $ | 88 |
2024 | 85 |
2025 | 83 |
2026 | 81 |
2027 | 80 |
Thereafter | 3,518 |
Total minimum lease payments | $ | 3,935 |
Payments for other commitments were $63 million in 2022, $50 million in 2021, and $45 million in 2020. Certain office facility leases contain escalation clauses requiring annual increases in rent. The rents may increase by a fixed amount each year, a percentage of the base rent, or the consumer price index. There are options to extend these leases for one to five years. In addition to the commitments in the table above, pursuant to SB 901, a shareholder contribution to the customer credit trust of $1.0 billion is to be made in 2024.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration