PG&E Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability Report 2018

Northern California Wildfires

Key Sustainability Indicators


2017 Result Legend

Blue text color
Target met or exceeded
Brown text color
Target not met
Metric 2017 Target 2017 Result 2018 Target
Gas Operations
Strength-Tested Transmission Pipeline
242 253 259
Transmission Pipeline Replacement
30 42 28
Valves Automated
(number of valves)
35 26 40
Retrofitted Transmission Pipeline
132 154 185
Gas Dig-Ins Footnote 1
(dig-ins per 1,000 Underground Service Alert tickets)
1.92 1.89 1.84
Electric Operations Footnote 2
System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI)
average number of outages per customer
1.00 0.958 0.978
System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI)
average duration of outages per customer in minutes
107.0 113.4 114.0
Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI)
average restoration time per outage in minutes
107.0 118.3 116.5
Nuclear Operations
Diablo Canyon Unit 1 Performance Indicator Footnote 3a 90.5 97.0 96.4
Diablo Canyon Unit 2 Performance Indicator Footnote 3b 87.6 90.0 87.6
Compliance and Risk Management
Employees Completing Annual Compliance and Ethics Training 99.8% 99.9% 99.8%
Management Employees Completing Annual Code of Conduct Training 99.8% 99.9% 99.8%
  • 1. Total number of third-party dig-ins (i.e., damage from a third party resulting in repair or replacement of an underground PG&E facility).1
  • 2. The slight decline in year-over-year reliability can mostly be attributed to a series of extreme weather events, including winter storms, triple-digit heat waves and wildfires.2
  • 3. Refers to the sum of 12 performance indicators for nuclear power generation reported to the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations and compared to industry benchmarks.3a, 3b


2017 Result Legend

Blue text color
Target met or exceeded
Brown text color
Target not met
Metric 2017 Target 2017 Result 2018 Target
Public Safety
Leak Repair Performance Footnote 1
(number at year-end)
100 or fewer 65 100 or fewer
Gas Emergency Response Footnote 2
21.0 20.4 21.0
Electric Emergency Response Footnote 3
(percentage within 60 minutes)
97.5% 96.6% 98%
Public Safety Index Footnote 4 N/A N/A 1.0
Asset Records Duration Index Footnote 5 N/A N/A 1.0
Workplace Safety
Lost Workday Case Rate Footnote 6 0.339 0.487 0.418
Serious Injuries and Fatalities Corrective Action Index Footnote 7 1.0 2.0 1.0
Serious Preventable Motor Vehicle Incident Rate Footnote 8 0.239 0.287 0.239
Timely Reporting of Injuries Footnote 9 71.3% 69.3% 71.3%
Safe Driving Rate Footnote 10 N/A N/A 6.5
  • 1. Number of grade 2 and 2+ leaks open at year-end. Grade 2 and 2+ leaks are minor and non-hazardous.1
  • 2. Average response time in minutes to an immediate response gas emergency order.2
  • 3. Percentage of time that PG&E personnel are on site within 60 minutes after receiving a 911 call of a potential PG&E electric hazard.3
  • 4. Weighted average of three electric programs that evaluate the effectiveness of compliance activities in the Fire Index Areas: (1) vegetation non-exempt pole clearing (25%), routine line vegetation management (50%) and tree mortality mitigation program (25%). Introduced in 2018, this index evaluates process compliance and drives process improvements related to wildfire safety.4
  • 5. Weighted index that tracks the average number of days to complete the as-built process in the system of record for electric and gas capital and expense jobs from the time construction is completed in the field or released to operations: (1) Gas: Transmission (30%), Station (5%), Distribution (15%) and (2) Electric: Transmission Line (12.5%), Substation (12.5%), Distribution (25%). Introduced in 2018, this metric drives timely updates of gas and electric records and systems.5
  • 6. Number of lost workday cases incurred per 200,000 hours worked (or for approximately every 100 employees).6
  • 7. For serious injuries and fatalities, this index measures the percentage of corrective actions completed on time and the quality of corrective actions as measured against an externally derived framework.7
  • 8. Number of serious preventable motor vehicle incidents occurring that the driver could have reasonably avoided, per 1 million miles driven.8
  • 9. Percentage of work-related injuries reported to the 24/7 Nurse Care Line within one day of the incident.9
  • 10. The total number of alerts for hard baking and hard acceleration per thousand miles driven in company vehicles equipped with in-vehicle performance monitors. Introduced in 2018, this measure drives safe driving behaviors by employees in our fleet vehicles.10

Customers and Communities

2017 Result Legend

Blue text color
Target met or exceeded
Brown text color
Target not met
Metric 2017 Target 2017 Result 2018 Target
Customer Satisfaction
Customer Satisfaction Score Footnote 1 76.4 75.6 75.2
Gas and Electric Meter Billing Accuracy Footnote 2
(percentage of bills)
99.68% 99.68% 99.64%
Customer Connection Cycle Time Footnote 3
(business days)
N/A N/A 10
Energy Affordability
Energy Savings Assistance Program
(number of homes weatherized)
90,030 87,052 94,532
California Alternative Rates for Energy
(number of eligible customers enrolled)
1,413,000 1,406,396 1,367,000
Customer Energy Efficiency Footnote 4
Electricity Saved (GWh) 1,144 1,487 916
Natural Gas Saved (million therms) 18.6 33.2 20.9
Generation Capacity Avoided (MW) 193 320 172
Supplier Diversity
Spending on Certified Diverse Suppliers
(percentage of overall purchasing expenditures)
42.0% 42.3% 40.0%
  • 1. Overall satisfaction of customers with the products and services offered by PG&E, as measured through a quarterly survey. Each year, we calibrate our customer satisfaction performance using results from J.D. Power’s Utility Customer Satisfaction Studies.1
  • 2. Refers to the percentage of bills that are not adjusted after being mailed to the customer. Each year, a very small percentage of bills must be estimated, largely due to intermittent connectivity (similar to a cell phone temporarily losing its connection).2
  • 3. Tracks the 12-month average design and construction cycle time for electric residential disconnect/reconnect work requested by customers and performed through Express Connections (our new customer gateway). This is a new metric introduced in 2018.3
  • 4. Data refers to annual energy savings or the first-year impacts associated with installed customer energy efficiency projects, as appropriate. Targets are based on mandated energy efficiency savings as agreed upon with the CPUC.4


2017 Result Legend

Blue text color
Target met or exceeded
Brown text color
Target not met
Metric 2017 Target 2017 Result 2018 Target
Employee Engagement
Employee Volunteer Hours 91,000 95,009 91,000
Employee Giving Campaign Pledges/Donations
(participation rate)
44% 44% 45%
Employee Engagement Index Footnote 1 N/A Footnote 2 N/A Footnote 2 70
Career Pathways
Training Effectiveness Footnote 3 4.52 4.52 4.52
PowerPathway graduates hired into industry jobs
82% 79% 82%
Health and Wellness
Workforce Unavailable Due to Health Footnote 4 6.9% 8.1% 7.9%
  • 1. Percentage of favorable responses to questions on employee survey that measure employee engagement.1
  • 2. There is no 2017 target because PG&E’s employee survey is fielded every two years, to allow more time to execute on action plans to address issues identified in the prior survey. Conducting biennial surveys is consistent with best practice among companies.2a, 2b
  • 3. Measures the effectiveness of PG&E’s internal training program on a five-point scale through employee surveys on predictive data from employees on their ability to use training on the job.3
  • 4. Percentage of full-time employees unavailable for work either due to long-term or short-term health reasons, as measured by total workdays lost for the entire year. In 2017, PG&E began administering our paid leave programs, which previously were administered by a third party. This allowed for additional insight into the number of employees using accrued sick time when they should have been on short-term or long-term disability leave. This insight led to a one-time increase in our workforce unavailable due to health result, which is reflected in 2017.4


2017 Result Legend

Blue text color
Target met or exceeded
Brown text color
Target not met
Metric 2017 Target 2017 Result 2018 Target
Agency Inspections Without a Written Enforcement Action 90% 93% 90%
Natural Resource Stewardship
“Bird-Safe” Utility Pole Retrofits 2,000 2,151 2,000
Clean Energy
Renewables Portfolio Standard 27% Footnote 1 33% 29% Footnote 1
Supplier Sustainability
Supplier Environmental Performance Standards Footnote 2 75% 78% 75%
Reducing Our Footprint
Avoided Greenhouse-Gas Emissions
(metric tons CO2)
N/A N/A 100,000 Footnote 3
  • 1. California’s target is to achieve an average of 30 percent over the 2017-2020 Renewables Portfolio Standard compliance period. As defined in Senate Bill 1078, which created California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard, and Senate Bill 1038, which modified the definition of “in-state renewable electricity generation technology,” an eligible renewable resource includes geothermal facilities, hydroelectric facilities with a capacity rating of 30 MW or less, biomass and biogas, selected municipal solid waste facilities, photovoltaic, solar thermal, and wind facilities, ocean thermal, tidal current, and wave energy generation technologies. These figures are preliminary and will not be finalized until verified by the California Energy Commission.1a1b
  • 2. Represents the percentage of top-tier suppliers (approximately 100 critical firms that represented about 60 percent of PG&E’s spend in 2016) that achieve a score of three or higher on a five-point scale relative to key elements of PG&E’s Supplier Environmental Performance Standards. Scoring is based on suppliers’ responses to an annual survey conducted by the Electric Utility Industry Sustainable Supply Chain Alliance.2
  • 3. Represents the first year of PG&E’s voluntary goal to avoid one million tons of cumulative greenhouse emissions from 2018 through 2022, compared to a 2016 baseline. The goal, referred to as the “Million Ton Challenge,” aims to reduce emissions from operations through energy-efficient and more sustainable facilities, continuing to deploy clean fleet vehicles, reducing methane emissions from natural gas operations, and adopting environmentally responsible products and services, with an initial focus on reducing the procurement of sulfur hexafluoride-containing electrical equipment.3