Utilities believe that they can achieve more standardization in developing a comprehensive, common and stable set of risk categories across all of its operations and risk. Commitment In general, the utilities support the Commission’s objective of standardization. In the shortterm, they support continued use of the 7x7 Matrix. In the longterm, they agree that future opportunities will allow more complex issues of risk tolerance and risk quantification to be addressed through dialogue and shared learning. They have agreed to continue to meet to explore the development of common standards that support movement towards implementing leading practices. SED Staff Comments SED recommends that all common elements identified in the Utilities SMAP Uniformity Report” introduced in the SMAP “Combined workshop on December 4, 2015, be adopted in this SMAP. SED Staff believes that this exercise brought increased clarity to the proceeding and the parties, and can serve as a step in a longterm process of improving risk assessment models and optimizing mitigations. In SED opinion, more can be made common than expressed by the utilities in their Uniformity Report. For example, there is no unique geographical or operational reason why high consequence events are more important to PG&E than they are to SCE or Sempra. Consideration of high consequence events may be desirable, but it is counterbalanced by the distortion to human perception it creates to produce a nonlinearscale risk score formula. Any distortion in a risk
Utilities believe that they can achieve more standardization in developing a comprehensive, common and stable set of risk categories across all of its operations and risk. Commitment In general, the utilities support the Commission’s objective of standardization. In the shortterm, they support continued use of the 7x7 Matrix. In the longterm, they agree that future opportunities will allow more complex issues of risk tolerance and risk quantification to be addressed through dialogue and shared learning. They have agreed to continue to meet to explore the development of common standards that support movement towards implementing leading practices. SED Staff Comments SED recommends that all common elements identified in the “Combined Utilities SMAP Uniformity Report” introduced in the SMAP workshop on December 4, 2015, be adopted in this SMAP. SED Staff believes that this exercise brought increased clarity to the proceeding and the parties, and can serve as a step in a longterm process of improving risk assessment models and optimizing mitigations. In SED opinion, more can be made common than expressed by the utilities in their Uniformity Report. For example, there is no unique geographical or operational reason why high consequence events are more important to PG&E than they are to SCE or Sempra. Consideration of high consequence events may be desirable, but it is counterbalanced by the distortion to human perception it creates to produce a nonlinearscale risk score formula. Any distortion in a risk
165862364.docx