should further specify the proper impact categories for consideration in a multiattribute utility function, and if so, whether, based on a record developed in such future SMAP, the Commission also would like to establish the attribute scales, ranges and weights. Together these interim and longterm plans will result in utility reliance on improved risk management methodologies and will achieve the Commission goal of “a more quantitative method for optimized risk mitigation.” Comparison of Utility and Joint Intervenor Approaches Based on an evaluation of the Joint Intervenor model and deeper understanding of utility risk management frameworks, the following table is a comparison of Utility Risk Evaluation Formulas and Risk Frameworks and the Joint Intervenors Framework: (SED Staff Report at 64, slightly modified based on comments.) Comparison of Utility Risk Evaluation Formulas and Risk Frameworks Joint PG&E SCE Sempra Intervenors Risk Management Framework Risk framework based on Enterprise Risk yes yes yes yes Management impact dimensions to be defined consider shareholder by the utility yes yes yes interests and/or financial or performance Commission Input Type no, only predominantly observed yes yes yes SMEestimated inputs data is unavailable Indexing method on partially yes, but no, uses frequency score allows for continuous, yes no selection(whole override with linearscale integeronly inputs, 1 to 7) actual frequency frequency Indexing method on consequence score yes yes yes no selections (whole
should further specify the proper impact categories for consideration in a multiattribute utility function, and if so, whether, based on a record developed in such future SMAP, the Commission also would like to establish the attribute scales, ranges and weights. Together these interim and longterm plans will result in utility reliance on improved risk management methodologies and will achieve the Commission goal of “a more quantitative method for optimized risk mitigation.” Comparison of Utility and Joint Intervenor Approaches Based on an evaluation of the Joint Intervenor model and deeper understanding of utility risk management frameworks, the following table is a comparison of Utility Risk Evaluation Formulas and Risk Frameworks and the Joint Intervenors Framework: (SED Staff Report at 64, slightly modified based on comments.) Comparison of Utility Risk Evaluation Formulas and Risk Frameworks PG&E SCE Sempra Joint Intervenors Risk Management Framework Risk framework based on Enterprise Risk Management yes yes yes yes impact dimensions consider shareholder interests and/or financial performance yes yes yes to be defined by the utility or Commission Input Type predominantly SMEestimated inputs yes yes yes no, only observed data is unavailable Indexing method on frequency score selection(whole integeronly inputs, 1 to 7) partially yes, but allows for override with actual frequency no, uses continuous, linearscale frequency yes no Indexing method on consequence score selections (whole yes yes yes no
165862364.docx