California regulators adopt $22 million PG&E settlement over Mosquito Fire safety violations

California regulators have adopted a $22 million shareholder-funded settlement with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. resolving the state investigation into alleged safety and reporting violations related to the 2022 Mosquito Fire.

The California Public Utilities Commission adopted Resolution SED-13 and the related Administrative Consent Order at its Aug. 13, 2026, conference. Under the agreement, PG&E will provide $21 million to the state General Fund and up to $1 million for an independent review of its Transmission Centralized Inspection Review Team, known as CIRT.

The settlement resolves the CPUC enforcement matter. It is not a direct compensation program for residents whose homes or property were damaged by the fire.

How the $22 million will be used

The $21 million General Fund payment is funded by PG&E shareholders. The CPUC records do not direct that money to Mosquito Fire survivors, property owners or firefighters, and the approved documents do not establish a direct effect on customer rates.

The separate, shareholder-funded commitment of up to $1 million will pay for an independent third-party review of CIRT. The review will examine the team’s policies, procedures, documentation, organizational structure, effectiveness, efficiency and compliance with the CPUC’s General Order 95 safety requirements.

CPUC staff will approve the contractor and the scope of work. The Safety and Enforcement Division also retains authority to pursue separate enforcement related to CIRT after the review is completed.

What the investigation documented

The Mosquito Fire began in September 2022 near Oxbow Reservoir in Placer County, in an area involving PG&E’s Middle Fork No. 1, Oxbow Tap and Weimar No. 1 60-kilovolt transmission circuits.

The CPUC investigation report says the fire burned 76,788 acres, destroyed 78 structures and damaged 13 others. It estimates more than $135.9 million in property damage involving PG&E and third parties. The report records no fatalities and says local media reported two firefighter injuries.

SED’s investigation identified 12 alleged violations of CPUC requirements involving repairs, loose tie wires, switch maintenance, vegetation clearance, evidence preservation, overhead-line safety and late initial notification under Resolution E-4184.

The report says investigators reviewed 13 transmission poles in the Oxbow Junction area and identified 12 violations of General Order 95 requirements. It also says PG&E filed its initial report on Sept. 8, 2022, rather than by Sept. 7, as required by Resolution E-4184.

PG&E disputed several allegations

The settlement does not represent an uncontested finding on every allegation. The CPUC resolution says PG&E agreed to certain alleged violations and agreed not to contest another, while disputing allegations involving loose tie wires, evidence preservation, switch maintenance, vegetation clearance and the timing of the incident report.

In its response, PG&E said some tie wires were not loose and argued that its operation of switches served the purpose of required function testing. The company also said vegetation within the required clearance area was minimal and separated by a rock outcrop.

PG&E acknowledged that a contractor did not complete a pole-clearance work order and that the removal of a pole and attached equipment without prior notification resulted from internal miscoordination. The company said it has since changed vegetation-management systems and procedures, added another maintenance cycle and adopted requirements for field personnel to be present before certain transmission switches are re-energized in high-fire-threat areas.

The settlement does not determine what ignited the fire

The CPUC investigation expressly says the Safety and Enforcement Division does not determine fire cause. The U.S. Forest Service is identified as the lead authority for determining the cause of the Mosquito Fire, and the CPUC report says it could be revised if the Forest Service releases additional findings.

That distinction matters because the settlement addresses alleged safety and regulatory violations by PG&E. It does not state that PG&E equipment caused or ignited the fire.

What happens next

The immediate next step is the selection of the independent reviewer and approval of the review’s scope by CPUC staff. The resulting report could produce recommendations about CIRT’s structure, responsibilities and practices.

For California residents, the case provides another example of how the state uses shareholder-funded penalties and required corrective work in utility wildfire oversight. It also sets a practical limit on what this action delivers: the $21 million payment goes to the General Fund, not directly to people who suffered losses in the 2022 fire.

Sources

• CPUC Resolution SED-13 approving the Mosquito Fire administrative consent order
• Los Angeles Times report on the proposed PG&E Mosquito Fire settlement

Look for updates to this story

Related News

• Southcentral Alaska utilities warn gas shortages could raise heating and power costs this winter
• Virginia proposes clearer triggers for nursing-home sanctions as complaint backlog persists
• Michigan says nine water systems reported cyberattack activity as FBI investigates
• Nebraska wildfire recovery enters federal reimbursement phase as Aug. 12 trucking deadline nears