PCG, §1A diff (2019 → 2020)

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results can be affected by many factors, including estimates and assumptions used in the critical accounting policies described in MD&A, that can cause their actual financial results to differ materially from historical results or from anticipated future financial results. The following discussion of key risk factors should be considered in evaluating an investment in PG&E Corporation and the Utility and should be read in conjunction with MD&A and the Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this 2019 Form 10-K. Any of these factors, in whole or in part, could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. Risks Related to Chapter 11 Proceedings and Liquidity PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 and are subject to the risks and uncertainties associated with their bankruptcy cases. On the Petition Date, PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 in the Bankruptcy Court. For the duration of the Chapter 11 Cases, the financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows of PG&E Corporation and the Utility will be subject to various risks, including but not limited to the following: •the ability to develop, consummate, and implement a plan of reorganization with respect to PG&E Corporation and the Utility during the Chapter 11 Cases that satisfies all applicable legal requirements, including the requirements of AB 1054; •the ability to develop and obtain applicable Bankruptcy Court, creditor, and regulatory approval of a successful plan of reorganization and the effect of any alternative proposals, views, and objections of official committees, creditors, state and federal regulators, and other stakeholders, which may make it difficult to develop and consummate a successful plan of reorganization in a timely manner and by June 30, 2020; •the risk that the Noteholder RSA, the Subrogation RSA, the TCC RSA or the PSAs could be terminated; •the risk that the Backstop Commitment Letters or Debt Commitment Letters could be terminated or that the conditions precedent to funding thereunder are not satisfied or waived; •the risk that, if the CPUC fails to approve any settlements between PG&E Corporation and the Utility and the CPUC, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s exit financing may be terminated, making it more difficult for PG&E Corporation and the Utility to emerge from Chapter 11 in a timely manner; •the ability to obtain Bankruptcy Court approval with respect to certain pending and future motions in the Chapter 11 Cases and the outcomes of Bankruptcy Court rulings and of the Chapter 11 Cases in general; •risks associated with third-party motions or adversary proceedings in the Chapter 11 Cases, which may interfere with business operations, including additional collateral requirements, or the ability to formulate and implement a plan of reorganization; •increased costs related to the Chapter 11 Cases and related litigation; •the ability to maintain or obtain sufficient financing sources for ongoing operations during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases or thereafter or to fund a plan of reorganization and meet future obligations, including the initial and annual contributions to the Wildfire Fund and commitments outlined in the Utility’s 2020 GRC, 2020-2022 WMP, and other regulatory proceedings; •the potential for a material decrease in the number of counterparties that are willing to engage in transactions, including commodity-related transactions, with PG&E Corporation or the Utility and a significant increase in the amount of collateral required to engage in any such transactions; •the potential for a loss of, or a disruption in the materials or services received from, suppliers, contractors or service providers with whom the Utility has commercial relationships or adverse developments in the commercial and financial terms on which such providers engage in such relationships with PG&E Corporation and the Utility; •risks associated with the potential liability arising from the 2019 Kincade fire and any other future post-petition wildfires or catastrophic events during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases; •risks associated with claims filed in the Chapter 11 Cases, including claims that have not yet been asserted, that do not specify an amount or in which the asserted amount exceeds the actual value of the claim, which present the potential for delays in the Chapter 11 Cases and which may make it difficult to assess the actual amount of the liability of PG&E Corporation or the Utility; •risks associated with the potential that the Utility will not be able to comply with the capital structure requirements authorized by the CPUC, to the extent applicable, during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases or thereafter; •potential increased difficulty in retaining and motivating key employees and potential increased difficulty in attracting new employees during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases and thereafter, including as a result of the challenging political and operating environment facing the company; •the significant time and effort required to be spent by senior management in dealing with the Chapter 11 Cases and restructuring activities rather than focusing exclusively on business operations; and •the ability to continue as a going concern. PG&E Corporation and the Utility currently are and will continue to be subject to risks and uncertainties with respect to the actions and decisions of creditors and other third parties who have claims or interests in the Chapter 11 Cases that may be inconsistent with PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s plans. These risks and uncertainties could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows in various ways that cannot be predicted and may significantly increase the time PG&E Corporation and the Utility have to operate in Chapter 11. Because of the risks and uncertainties associated with the Chapter 11 Cases, it is not possible to predict or quantify the ultimate impact that events occurring during the Chapter 11 Cases may have on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows, nor is it possible to predict the ultimate impact that events occurring during the Chapter 11 Cases may have on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s corporate and capital structure. PG&E Corporation and the Utility currently are and will continue to be required to seek approvals of the Bankruptcy Court and certain regulators in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases, and certain parties may object, intervene and protest approval, absent the imposition of terms or conditions to resolve their concerns. Such approvals may be denied, conditioned or delayed. Operating under Chapter 11 may continue to restrict the ability of PG&E Corporation and the Utility to pursue strategic and operational initiatives. Under Chapter 11, transactions outside the ordinary course of business are subject to the prior approval of the Bankruptcy Court, which may limit PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to respond in a timely manner to certain events or take advantage of certain opportunities or to adapt to changing market or industry conditions. These limitations include, among other things, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to: •make capital investments outside the normal course of business; •consolidate, merge, sell, or otherwise dispose of assets outside the normal course of business; •grant liens; and •finance operations, investments or other capital needs or engage in other business activities, including the ability to achieve California’s renewable energy goals. PG&E Corporation and the Utility may continue to experience increased levels of employee attrition as a result of the filing of the Chapter 11 Cases. As a result of the filing of the Chapter 11 Cases, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have experienced and may continue to experience increased levels of employee attrition, and their employees will continue to face considerable distraction and uncertainty. A loss of key personnel or material erosion of employee morale could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to engage, motivate and retain key employees or take other measures intended to motivate and incentivize key employees to remain with PG&E Corporation or the Utility, as applicable, through the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases is limited by restrictions on implementation of retention and incentive programs under the Bankruptcy Code. The loss of members of senior management could impair PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to execute their strategies and implement operational initiatives, which would likely have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. As a result of the Chapter 11 Cases, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s historical financial information may not be indicative of future financial performance. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s capital structure will likely be significantly altered under any plan of reorganization confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court. Under fresh-start accounting rules that may apply to PG&E Corporation and the Utility upon the effective date of a plan of reorganization, their assets and liabilities would be adjusted to fair value. Accordingly, if fresh-start accounting rules apply, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition and results of operations following emergence from Chapter 11 would not be comparable to the financial condition and results of operations reflected in their historical financial statements. In connection with the Chapter 11 Cases and the development of a plan of reorganization, it is also possible that additional restructuring and related charges may be identified and recorded in future periods. Such charges could be material to PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. If PG&E Corporation and the Utility are not able to consummate a consensual plan of reorganization, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected by a protracted restructuring. PG&E Corporation and the Utility commenced the Chapter 11 Cases without the benefit of a restructuring support agreement or agreed consensual plan of reorganization with any of its creditors or other key constituents. On October 17, 2019, the TCC and the Ad Hoc Noteholder Committee filed their competing Ad Hoc Noteholder Plan. In connection with the Noteholder RSA (as defined below), the competing Ad Hoc Noteholder Plan was withdrawn on February 5, 2020. If the Noteholder RSA were to be terminated, or if a new competing plan of reorganization were filed by any constituents, the resulting competing plan process could reduce the likelihood that the plan of reorganization that is ultimately confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court is the Proposed Plan and, in any event, could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to achieve confirmation of a plan of reorganization that would enable PG&E Corporation and the Utility to reach their stated goals. Additionally, any RSAs entered into in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases are likely to be highly conditional on circumstances outside the control of PG&E Corporation and the Utility. Accordingly, no assurance can be provided as to the length of time during which the Chapter 11 Cases will be pending, whether the Proposed Plan can be successfully consummated, how the terms of the Proposed Plan may change, whether the Proposed Plan will be the plan of reorganization that is ultimately consummated, how the proposed post-emergence capital structure may change, and what the effect of the Proposed Plan or any other plan of reorganization that is confirmed would have on PG&E Corporation and the Utility or on any of their respective equity, debt and other stakeholders, including as to matters of taxation and recovery or distributions upon consummation of any plan of reorganization. Even if PG&E Corporation and the Utility are successful in obtaining confirmation of the Proposed Plan, the process has been, and will continue to be lengthy, costly and disruptive. A contested plan of reorganization proceeding would likely have a more pronounced material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows than a consensual plan of reorganization. Even if PG&E Corporation and the Utility are able to obtain requisite stakeholder approval, the Bankruptcy Court may not confirm a plan of reorganization. The uncertainty surrounding the prolonged restructuring may also have other material effects on PG&E Corporation and the Utility including, but not limited to: •the ability of PG&E Corporation and the Utility to raise additional capital; •PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s liquidity; •how PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s business is viewed by regulators, investors, lenders and credit ratings agencies; •the ability of PG&E Corporation and the Utility to make capital expenditures, including to invest in initiatives necessary to ensure the continued safe operation of the business; •whether the Utility can qualify for the benefits under AB 1054, including obtaining the required state approvals by the statutory deadline; •whether PG&E Corporation is required to transfer control or ownership of the Utility or its business to a third party, such as the State of California or a third party monitor or receiver that is not accountable to PG&E Corporation’s board of directors or shareholders; •PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s enterprise value; and •PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to continue as a going concern. PG&E Corporation and the Utility may be subject to claims that will not be discharged in their Chapter 11 Cases, which could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Bankruptcy Code provides that the confirmation of a plan of reorganization discharges a debtor from substantially all claims arising prior to its filing under Chapter 11. With few exceptions, all claims that arose prior to PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Chapter 11 Cases: (i) would be subject to compromise and/or treatment under the plan of reorganization and (ii) would be discharged in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code and the terms of the plan of reorganization. PG&E Corporation and the Utility face several significant potential liabilities that arose after the start of the Chapter 11 Cases, including potential liabilities associated with the 2019 Kincade fire and the PSPS Program. Any claims not ultimately discharged through a plan of reorganization could be asserted against the reorganized entities and may have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows on a post-reorganization basis and may cast substantial doubt on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to continue as a going concern. The DIP Facilities may be insufficient to fund PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s cash requirements through their emergence from bankruptcy. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s liquidity, including PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to meet their ongoing operational obligations, is dependent upon, among other things: (i) PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to comply with the terms and conditions of any post-petition financing and cash collateral order entered by the Bankruptcy Court in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases, including the financing orders entered with respect to the DIP Credit Agreement, (ii) PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to maintain adequate cash on hand, (iii) PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to generate cash flow from operations, (iv) PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to develop, confirm and consummate a plan of reorganization or other alternative restructuring transaction and (v) the cost, duration and outcome of the Chapter 11 Cases. For the duration of the Chapter 11 Cases, PG&E Corporation and the Utility will be subject to various risks, including but not limited to (i) the inability to maintain or obtain sufficient financing sources for operations or to fund any plan of reorganization and meet future obligations, and (ii) increased legal and other professional costs associated with the Chapter 11 Cases and the reorganization. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have entered into the DIP Credit Agreement. On March 27, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court approved the DIP Facilities (as defined below) on a final basis, authorizing the Utility to borrow up to the full amount of the DIP Revolving Facility (including the full amount of the $1.5 billion letter of credit subfacility), the DIP Initial Term Loan Facility and the DIP Delayed Draw Term Loan Facility (as defined below), in each case subject to the terms and conditions of the DIP Credit Agreement. For the duration of the Chapter 11 Cases, PG&E Corporation and the Utility expect that the DIP Credit Agreement, together with cash on hand and cash flow from operations, will be the Utility’s primary source of capital to fund ongoing operations and other capital needs and that they will have limited, if any, access to additional financing. For more information on the DIP Credit Agreement, see Note 5 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8. The DIP Credit Agreement will mature on December 31, 2020, subject to the Utility’s option to extend the maturity to December 31, 2021 if certain terms and conditions are satisfied, including the payment of an extension fee. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have faced and will continue to face uncertainty regarding the adequacy of their liquidity and capital resources during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases, and have limited, if any, access to additional financing. PG&E Corporation and the Utility cannot provide assurance that cash on hand, cash flow from operations, distributions received from their subsidiaries and borrowings available under the DIP Credit Agreement will be sufficient to continue to fund operations during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases. Although the DIP Credit Agreement is expected to be sufficient to address liquidity needs for the expected duration of the Chapter 11 Cases, if the Chapter 11 Cases last longer than expected (particularly if the Proposed Plan is not confirmed by June 30, 2020) there can be no assurance that the DIP Credit Agreement will provide adequate liquidity for such scenario. The ability of PG&E Corporation and the Utility to maintain adequate liquidity depends in part upon industry conditions and general economic, financial, competitive, regulatory and other factors beyond their control. In the event that cash on hand, cash flow from operations, distributions received from subsidiaries and availability under the DIP Credit Agreement are not sufficient to meet these liquidity needs, PG&E Corporation and the Utility may be required to seek additional financing, and can provide no assurance that additional financing would be available or, if available, offered on acceptable terms. The DIP Credit Agreement imposes a number of restrictions on PG&E Corporation and the Utility that may, among other things, limit their ability to conduct their business, or pursue new business opportunities and strategies. Additionally, PG&E Corporation and the Utility may be unable to comply with the covenants imposed by the DIP Credit Agreement. Such non-compliance could result in an event of default under the DIP Credit Agreement that, if not cured or waived, could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The DIP Credit Agreement imposes a number of restrictions on PG&E Corporation and the Utility, including, among other things, affirmative covenants requiring PG&E Corporation and the Utility to provide financial information, cash flow forecasts, variance reports and other information to the administrative agent. The DIP Credit Agreement also contains general affirmative covenants such as compliance with all applicable laws, maintenance of licenses from necessary governmental authorities, maintenance of property and preservation of corporate existence. Negative covenants contained in the DIP Credit Agreement include restrictions on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to, among other things, incur additional indebtedness, create liens on assets, make investments, loans or advances, engage in mergers, consolidations, sales of assets and acquisitions, pay dividends and distributions, and make payments in respect of junior or pre-petition indebtedness, in each case subject to customary exceptions. The Utility’s ability to borrow under the DIP Credit Agreement is subject to the satisfaction of certain customary conditions precedent set forth therein. For more information on the DIP Credit Agreement, see Note 5 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8. As a result of these covenants and restrictions, PG&E Corporation and the Utility may be limited in their ability to conduct their business, and respond to changing business, market, and economic conditions. These provisions may also limit PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to pursue new business opportunities and strategies. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to comply with these provisions may be affected by events beyond their control and their failure to comply, or obtain a waiver in the event PG&E Corporation or the Utility cannot comply with a covenant, could result in an event of default under the agreements governing the DIP Credit Agreement that, if not cured or waived, could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Backstop Commitment Letters and the Debt Commitment Letters provide a number of conditions precedent to the obligations of the Backstop Parties and the Commitment Parties to fund the Proposed Plan as well as a number of termination rights for the Backstop Parties and the Commitment Parties. There can be no assurance that the conditions precedent will be satisfied or waived, or that events or circumstances will not occur that give rise to the termination rights. If the conditions precedent to funding cannot be satisfied or waived, or if the Backstop Commitment Letters or the Debt Commitment Letters are terminated, it could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Backstop Commitment Letters impose a number of conditions that must be satisfied before the Backstop Parties are obligated to fund the Proposed Plan. In addition, the Backstop Parties have certain termination rights under the Backstop Commitment Letters, which may be triggered by events beyond the control of PG&E Corporation and the Utility. The Debt Commitment Letters are also subject to numerous conditions precedent and termination rights, including certain conditions precedent and termination rights similar to those included in the Backstop Commitment Letters, as well as certain other conditions precedent, including that the Utility shall have received investment grade senior secured debt ratings. For more information on the Backstop Commitment Letters and the Debt Commitment Letters, including a summary of conditions precedent and termination rights, see “Plan of Reorganization, RSAs, Equity Backstop Commitments and Debt Commitment Letters” in Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. If PG&E Corporation and the Utility fail to complete a monetization transaction utilizing any net operating losses or tax deductions resulting from the payment of pre-petition wildfire-related claims as contemplated in the Backstop Commitment Letters, PG&E Corporation and the Utility must form a trust which would provide for periodic distributions of cash to the Backstop Parties in amounts equal to (i) all tax benefits arising from the payment of wildfire-related claims in excess of (ii) the first $1.35 billion of tax benefits, starting with fiscal year 2020, and PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. There can be no assurance that the conditions precedent set forth in the Backstop Commitment Letters or the Debt Commitment Letters will be satisfied or waived, or that events or circumstances will not occur that give rise to termination rights of the Backstop Parties or the Commitment Parties, which may be beyond the control of PG&E Corporation and the Utility. If the conditions precedent to funding under the Backstop Commitment Letters or the Debt Commitment Letters cannot be satisfied or waived, or if the Backstop Commitment Letters or Debt Commitment Letters are terminated, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to finance the Proposed Plan could be jeopardized, which could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. Additionally, there can be no assurance that PG&E Corporation and the Utility would be able to obtain alternative financing to the transactions contemplated by the Backstop Commitment Letters and the Debt Commitment Letters. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared assuming that PG&E Corporation and the Utility will continue as going concerns. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are facing extraordinary challenges relating to a series of catastrophic wildfires that occurred during the past several years. Uncertainty regarding these matters raises substantial doubt about PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s abilities to continue as going concerns. In addition, there is inherent uncertainty regarding the outcome of the Chapter 11 Cases. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have not included any financial statement adjustments that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties. The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements to this Annual Report on Form 10-K have been prepared assuming that PG&E Corporation and the Utility will continue as going concerns. PG&E Corporation and the Utility suffered material losses as a result of the 2017 Northern California wildfires and the 2018 Camp fire, which contributed to the decision to file for Chapter 11 protection. Management has concluded that these circumstances raise substantial doubt about PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to continue as going concerns, and their independent registered public accountants have included an explanatory paragraph in their auditors’ report which states certain conditions exist that raise substantial doubt about PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to continue as going concerns in relation to the foregoing. In addition, there is inherent uncertainty regarding the outcome of the Chapter 11 Cases. For further discussion of such uncertainty, see the risk factors above in “Risks Related to Chapter 11 Proceedings and Liquidity” in this Item 1A. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s plans in regard to these matters are described in Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8. The Consolidated Financial Statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of these uncertainties. See “Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Item 8. Trading in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s securities during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases is highly speculative and poses substantial risks. Trading in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s securities during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases is highly speculative and poses substantial risks. The ultimate recovery, if any, by holders of PG&E Corporation’s or the Utility’s securities in the Chapter 11 Cases could differ substantially from any value that may be implied by the trading prices of such securities at any particular time during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases. Risks Related to Wildfires PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected by potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and other pre-petition fires (including the 2015 Butte fire), notwithstanding the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected by potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and other pre-petition fires (including the 2015 Butte fire), notwithstanding the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases. As disclosed below in Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are subject to numerous lawsuits in connection with the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and other pre-petition fires by various plaintiffs, including wildfire victims, insurance carriers, and various government entities, under multiple theories of liability. These lawsuits generally assert that the Utility’s alleged failure to maintain and repair its distribution and transmission lines and failure to properly maintain the vegetation surrounding such lines were the causes of the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires. Due to the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases, these plaintiffs have been stayed from continuing to prosecute pending litigation and from commencing new lawsuits against PG&E Corporation or the Utility on account of pre-petition obligations. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s obligations with respect to such claims are expected to be determined through the Chapter 11 process. If the Subrogation RSA, TCC RSA or PSAs were to be terminated and litigation relating to the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and other pre-petition wildfires were to recommence, and the Utility’s facilities, such as its electric distribution and transmission lines, were determined to be the substantial cause of one or more fires, 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, which liability, in the aggregate, could be substantial and have a material adverse effect on PG&E Corporation and the Utility, including on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to develop and consummate a successful plan of reorganization. (See “The doctrine of inverse condemnation, if applied by courts in litigation to which PG&E Corporation or the Utility are subject, could significantly expand the potential liabilities from such litigation and materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows” below.) In addition to such claims for property damage, business interruption, interest, and attorneys’ fees, 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, including if the Utility were found to have been negligent, which liability, in the aggregate, could be substantial and have a material adverse effect on PG&E Corporation and the Utility, including on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to develop and consummate a successful plan of reorganization. Although PG&E Corporation and the Utility have entered into settlement agreements to resolve the claims of the major classes of claimholders, including Utility debtholders, individual wildfire victims, holders of subrogated insurance claims and certain public entities, non-consenting claimholders may still be able to challenge and otherwise impede the Proposed Plan. These settlement agreements could be terminated under various circumstances, some of which are beyond the PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s control. As described below in Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have entered into agreements with major claimholders or their representatives to settle all pre-petition liabilities related to the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires (and in certain cases, other pre-petition fires) for an aggregate amount of $25.5 billion. These agreements are subject to numerous conditions and termination rights in favor of third parties, including, among others, (i) certain breaches by PG&E Corporation or the Utility, (ii) if PG&E Corporation or the Utility become insolvent, (iii) if the Proposed Plan is inconsistent with the terms of these agreements, (iv) if certain milestones are not met and (v) failure of the Proposed Plan or the treatment of claims contemplated thereby to be consistent with AB 1054. Certain of these agreements contain additional termination rights that are beyond the control of PG&E Corporation or the Utility. For example, the PSA with Supporting Public Entities may be terminated by the Supporting Public Entities if FEMA or the OES fail to agree that no reimbursement is required from the Supporting Public Entities on account of assistance rendered by either agency in connection with the wildfires noted above. If one or more of these settlement agreements is terminated, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s aggregate liability related to the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires (and in certain cases, other pre-petition fires) could substantially exceed $25.5 billion. In addition, if these agreements were terminated, regardless of the ultimate determination of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s liability, such termination would be expected to result in additional delay and expense in the Chapter 11 Cases. In addition, the TCC RSA is an agreement among PG&E Corporation and the Utility, the TCC, the Shareholder Proponents, and the Consenting Fire Claimant Professionals. No government entity (including FEMA and OES/Cal Fire) is party to the TCC RSA. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that such government entities will support the Proposed Plan or the treatment of their Fire Victim Claims in the Chapter 11 Cases as provided in the Proposed Plan. If FEMA, OES/Cal Fire, or other government entities that are not Supporting Public Entities do not support the Proposed Plan or treatment of their Fire Victim Claims, such claims could be material to PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. On February 12, 2020, a number of individuals and businesses who hold wildfire-related claims in connection with the 2015 Butte fire, 2017 Northern California wildfires and 2018 Camp fire, as well as certain of the Tubbs Preference Plaintiffs, joined in the TCC’s objection to the OES and FEMA claims. Also on February 12, 2020, OES and FEMA filed oppositions to the TCC’s objection. Absent the settlement agreements noted above, potential liabilities related to the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires depend on various factors, including, but not limited to, the cause of each fire, contributing causes of the fires (including alternative potential origins, weather and climate related issues), 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 extent to which future claims arise, the amount of fire suppression and clean-up costs and other damages the Utility may be responsible for if found negligent. Notwithstanding the Bar Date and the settlement agreements entered into as of the date of this filing, there remain 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 treatment of such claims in the Chapter 11 Cases. If PG&E Corporation and the Utility were to be found liable for any punitive damages, and such damages were allowed by the Bankruptcy Court, or if PG&E Corporation and the Utility were subject to fines or penalties that may be imposed by government entities on PG&E Corporation and the Utility, the amount of such punitive damages, fines, penalties or restitution orders that may result from any criminal charges brought could be significant and could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows, as well as PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to develop and consummate a successful plan of reorganization. In connection with the Wildfires OII, the Utility has agreed to remedies that will result in substantial capital expenditures that will not be subject to cost recovery. The Utility has received significant fines and penalties in connection with past incidents. For example, in 2015, the CPUC approved a decision that imposed penalties on the Utility totaling $1.6 billion in connection with natural gas explosion that occurred in the City of San Bruno on September 9, 2010 (the “San Bruno explosion”). These penalties represented nearly three times the underlying liability for the San Bruno explosion of approximately $558 million incurred for third-party claims, exclusive of shareholder derivative lawsuits and legal costs incurred. The amount of punitive damages, fines and penalties imposed on PG&E Corporation or the Utility could likewise be a significant amount in relation to the underlying liabilities with respect to the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires. In addition, PG&E Corporation and the Utility could be the subject of additional lawsuits on account of obligations arising after the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases and of additional investigations, citations, fines or enforcement actions in connection with the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected as a result of the 2019 Kincade fire and any future post-petition wildfire during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected as a result of the 2019 Kincade fire and future post-petition wildfires during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases. As described below in Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements under the heading “2019 Kincade fire,” while the cause of the 2019 Kincade fire remains under Cal Fire’s investigation and there are a number of unknown facts surrounding the cause of the 2019 Kincade fire, the Utility could be subject to significant liability in excess of insurance coverage that would be expected to have a material impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have received and are responding to data requests from the CPUC’s SED relating to the Kincade fire. PG&E Corporation and the Utility could be the subject of additional investigations, lawsuits, or enforcement actions in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire. Additionally, regardless of whether the Utility is ultimately determined to have caused the 2019 Kincade fire or any future post-petition wildfire during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s bankruptcy timing and process and the ability of the Utility to participate in the Wildfire Fund could be materially affected as a result of claims arising out of the 2019 Kincade fire. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to consummate the Proposed Plan by June 30, 2020 (or at all) could be impaired, and PG&E Corporation and the Utility may not be able to amend the Proposed Plan, or develop another alternative to the Proposed Plan, that could be confirmed by June 30, 2020 or at all. The Backstop Commitment Letters and the Debt Commitment Letters contain certain conditions precedent and termination rights that could be implicated by the 2019 Kincade fire and any future post-petition wildfire during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases. PG&E Corporation and the Utility may not be able to satisfy, or obtain a waiver of, such conditions precedent to the commitments, or the Backstop Parties or the Commitment Parties, respectively, may have the right to terminate such commitments, which would jeopardize PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to finance the Proposed Plan. PG&E Corporation and the Utility may not be able to obtain alternative financing to the transactions contemplated by the Backstop Commitment Letters and the Debt Commitment Letters, and may not be able to obtain financing for an alternative plan that may be proposed by PG&E Corporation and the Utility after the impact of the 2019 Kincade fire is better known. Finally, the 2019 Kincade fire or a future post-petition wildfire could have adverse consequences on the Utility’s probation proceeding, the Utility’s proceedings with the CPUC and FERC (including the Safety Culture OII and the Chapter 11 Proceedings OII), the criminal investigation into the 2018 Camp fire and future regulatory proceedings, including future applications for the safety certification required by AB 1054. PG&E Corporation and the Utility may also suffer additional reputational harm and face an even more challenging operating, political, and regulatory environment. For more information about the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires, see “2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires” in Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8. The amount of potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires is expected to greatly exceed the amount of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s insurance coverage for wildfire events. The amount of potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2019 Kincade fire could also exceed the amount of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s insurance coverage for wildfires. Securing liability insurance in future years is expected to be increasingly difficult and expensive, if available at all. The amount of potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires is expected to greatly exceed the amount of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s insurance coverage for wildfire events. The amount of potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2019 Kincade fire could also exceed the amount of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s insurance coverage for wildfire events. Even if the Utility satisfies the eligibility and other requirements to participate in the Wildfire Fund under AB 1054, the recovery of any such excess losses from the Wildfire Fund would be capped at 40%. PG&E Corporation and the Utility had liability insurance coverage for wildfire events in an aggregate amount of approximately $1.4 billion for the period from August 1, 2018 through July 31, 2019, comprised of $700 million for general liability (subject to an initial self-insured retention of $10 million per occurrence), and $700 million for property damages only, which property damage coverage includes an aggregate amount of approximately $200 million through the reinsurance market where a catastrophe bond was utilized. Further, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have liability insurance coverage for wildfire events in an amount of $430 million (subject to an initial self-insured retention of $10 million per occurrence) for the period of August 1, 2019 through July 31, 2020, and $1 billion in liability insurance coverage for non-wildfire events (subject to an initial self-insured retention of $10 million per occurrence), comprised of $520 million for the period of August 1, 2019 through July 31, 2020 and $480 million for the period of September 3, 2019 through September 2, 2020. In addition, coverage limits within these wildfire insurance policies could result in further material self-insured costs in the event each fire were deemed to be a separate occurrence under the terms of the insurance policies. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s cost of obtaining the wildfire and non-wildfire insurance coverage in place for the period of August 1, 2019 through September 2, 2020 is approximately $212 million, compared to the approximately $50 million that the Utility recovered in rates during the year ended December 31, 2019. If PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to recover the full amount of their insurance, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. In addition, PG&E Corporation and the Utility expect their losses in connection with the 2018 Camp fire and 2017 Northern California wildfires will greatly exceed their available insurance, and the Utility could also be subject to significant liability in excess of insurance in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire. For a discussion of the potential magnitude of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s liability, see “PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected by potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2018 Camp fire and the 2017 Northern California wildfires and other pre-petition fires (including the 2015 Butte fire), notwithstanding the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases” and “PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected as a result of the 2019 Kincade fire and any future post-petition wildfire during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases.” above. PG&E Corporation and the Utility also expect to face increasing difficulty securing liability insurance in future years due to availability and to face significantly increased insurance costs. If the Utility is unable to recover all or a significant portion of its excess costs in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire, the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and the 2015 Butte fire through ratemaking mechanisms and in a timely manner, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. As of December 31, 2019, the Utility incurred substantial costs in connection with the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and the 2015 Butte fire in excess of costs currently in rates, some of which currently are or are expected to be recorded in the future in its WEMA account. The Utility could similarly incur substantial costs in excess of insurance coverage in the future in connection with the 2019 Kincade fire. There can be no assurance that the Utility will be allowed to recover costs in excess of insurance, including costs recorded in those accounts in the future, 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. SB 901, signed into law on September 21, 2018, required the CPUC to establish a CHT, directing the CPUC to limit certain disallowances in the aggregate, so that they do not exceed the maximum amount that the Utility can pay without harming ratepayers or materially impacting its ability to provide adequate and safe service. SB 901 also authorized the CPUC to issue a financing order that permits recovery, through the issuance of recovery bonds (also referred to as “securitization”), of wildfire-related costs found to be just and reasonable by the CPUC and, only for the 2017 Northern California wildfires, any amounts in excess of the CHT. SB 901 does not authorize securitization with respect to possible 2018 Camp fire costs, as the bill does not address fires that occurred in 2018. After a CPUC July 8, 2019 decision determined that a utility that has filed for relief under Chapter 11 cannot access the CHT, on August 7, 2019, the Utility submitted to the CPUC an application for rehearing of that decision, the outcome of which is uncertain. For more information on the OIR, see “OIR to Implement Public Utilities Code Section 451.2 Regarding Criteria and Methodology for Wildfire Cost Recovery Pursuant to Senate Bill 901” in Item 7. MD&A. The inability to recover all or a significant portion of costs in excess of insurance through increases in rates and by collecting such rates in a timely manner could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected in the event of further non-compliance with the terms of probation or in the event of further modifications to the conditions of probation. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected in the event of further non-compliance with the terms of probation or in the event of further modifications to the conditions of probation. On January 26, 2017, following the federal criminal trial against the Utility in connection with the San Bruno explosion, in which the Utility was found guilty on six felony counts, the Utility was sentenced to, among other things, a five-year corporate probation period and oversight by a third-party monitor for a period of five years, with the ability to apply for early termination after three years. The probation includes a requirement that the Utility not commit any local, state, or federal crimes during the probation period. As part of the probation, the Utility has retained a third-party monitor at the Utility’s expense. The goal of the third-party monitor is to help ensure that the Utility takes reasonable and appropriate steps to maintain the safety of its gas and electric operations, and to maintain effective ethics, compliance and safety related incentive programs on a Utility-wide basis. In 2018 and 2019, the court overseeing the Utility’s probation issued various orders related to the Utility’s probation, including a finding that the Utility had violated a condition of its probation with respect to reporting requirements, and imposing new conditions of probation. For more information about the Utility’s probation and the court’s orders, see “U.S. District Court Matters and Probation” in Item 3. Such proceedings are not subject to the automatic stay imposed as a result of the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases. The Utility could incur material costs, not recoverable through rates, in the event of further non-compliance with the terms of its probation and in connection with the monitorship (including but not limited to costs resulting from recommendations of the third-party monitor). The Utility could also incur material costs, not recoverable through rates, in the event of further modifications to the conditions of its probation, such as those proposed by the court overseeing the Utility’s probation on January 16, 2020, relating to the hiring of additional contractors to ensure full compliance with certain vegetation management conditions. The outcome of probation could harm the Utility’s relationships with customers, regulators, legislators, communities, business partners, or other constituencies and make it more difficult to recruit qualified personnel and senior management. Further, it could negatively affect the outcome of future ratemaking and regulatory proceedings and result in increased regulatory or legislative scrutiny, including with respect to various aspects of how the Utility’s business is conducted or organized. (See “Enforcement and Litigation Matters” in Item 7. MD&A.) The doctrine of inverse condemnation, if applied by courts in litigation to which PG&E Corporation or the Utility are subject, could significantly expand the potential liabilities from such litigation and materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. California law includes a doctrine of inverse condemnation that is routinely invoked in California. Inverse condemnation imposes strict liability (including liability for attorneys’ fees) for damages as a result of the design, construction and maintenance of utility facilities, including utilities’ electric transmission lines. 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 benefitted from such undertaking, and based on the assumption that utilities have the ability to recover these costs from their customers. Plaintiffs have asserted the doctrine of inverse condemnation in lawsuits related to the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and the 2015 Butte fire, and courts have ruled that the doctrine can apply to PG&E Corporation and the Utility in those matters. While the Utility currently continues to litigate this issue, there can be no assurance that the Utility will be successful in overturning the rulings that inverse condemnation applies in the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and the 2015 Butte fire or other litigation against PG&E Corporation or the Utility. Furthermore, a court could determine that the doctrine of inverse condemnation applies even in the absence of an open CPUC proceeding for cost recovery, or before a potential cost recovery decision is issued by the CPUC. Although the imposition of liability under the doctrine of inverse condemnation is premised on the assumption that utilities have the ability to automatically recover these costs from their customers, there can be no assurance that the CPUC would authorize cost recovery whether or not a previous court decision had imposed liability on a utility under the doctrine of inverse condemnation. (In December 2017, the CPUC denied recovery of costs that San Diego Gas & Electric Company stated it incurred as a result of the doctrine of inverse condemnation, holding that the inverse condemnation principles of strict liability are not relevant to the CPUC’s prudent manager standard. That determination was challenged by San Diego Gas & Electric as well as by the Utility and Southern California Edison. In October 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the case, effectively ending the challenge.) If PG&E Corporation or the Utility were to be found liable for damages under the doctrine of inverse condemnation, but the Utility was unable to secure a cost recovery decision from the CPUC to pay for such costs through increases in rates or to collect such rates in a timely manner, the financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows of PG&E Corporation and the Utility would be materially affected by potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2019 Kincade fire, and, if the TCC RSA, Subrogation RSA, or PSAs were to be terminated, the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and the 2015 Butte fire. (See “PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected by potential losses resulting from the impact of the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires and other pre-petition fires (including the 2015 Butte fire), notwithstanding the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases,” and “PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected as a result of the 2019 Kincade fire and any future post-petition wildfire during the pendency of the Chapter 11 Cases” above.) PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results could be materially affected as a result of the Utility’s implementation of its PSPS program. As outlined in the 2019 Wildfire Mitigation Plan, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have adopted the PSPS program to proactively de-energize lines that traverse areas under elevated and extreme risks for wildfire when forecasts predict extreme fire-threat conditions. In addition to the 2019 PSPS events, the Utility expects that PSPS events will be necessary in 2020 and future years. Approximately 5.4 million electric customer premises may potentially be impacted by PSPS events. Since June 2019, PG&E Corporation and the Utility have carried out several PSPS events. These PSPS events have been subject to significant scrutiny and criticism by various stakeholders, including the California Governor, the CPUC and the court overseeing the Utility’s probation. On November 12, 2019, the CPUC issued an order to show cause why the Utility should not be sanctioned for alleged violations of law related to its communications with customers, coordination with local governments, and communications with critical facilities and public safety partners during the PSPS events in late 2019. On November 13, 2019, the CPUC instituted an OII to examine 2019 PSPS events carried out by California’s investor-owned utilities and to consider enforcement actions. The Utility also is the subject of a class action litigation in connection with the 2019 PSPS events that was filed in the Bankruptcy Court in December of 2019. On January 24, 2020, the assigned ALJ issued a proposed decision in the 2020 Energy Resource Recovery Account (ERRA) Forecast proceeding that, if finalized, would require the Utility to include in its application for the 2019 ERRA Compliance Review an accounting of the PSPS events that occurred in its service territory in 2019 and how the PSPS impacted its revenue collections. Also, on January 27, 2020, the California state senate approved SB 378 that, if passed by the assembly and then enacted into law, would require the CPUC, on or before June 1, 2021, to establish a procedure for customers, local governments, and others affected by a de-energization event to recover specified costs incurred as a result of the de-energization event from an electrical corporation within specified time periods. The bill would also require the CPUC to establish rules determining whether these payments can be recovered from ratepayers. In addition, the proposal of SB 378, which would impose penalties and other requirements on electric utility companies relating to PSPS events, could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. In addition to other requirements, SB 378 would impose on an electric utility company a civil penalty of at least $250,000 per 50,000 affected customers for every hour that a PSPS event is in place, would require the CPUC to establish a procedure for customers, local governments and others to recover specified costs incurred during a PSPS event from the electric utility company, which cost recovery would be borne by shareholders, and would prohibit an electric utility company from billing customers for any nonfixed costs during a PSPS event. Further, the proposals of AB 1941 could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. AB 1941 proposes to suspend RPS requirements, determine the savings to electric utility companies from the suspension and direct those savings towards system hardening to mitigate wildfire risks and PSPS impacts, and would prohibit salary increases or bonuses to executive officers during the suspension of RPS requirements. PG&E Corporation and the Utility cannot predict the timing and outcome of the OII, order to show cause, the class action litigation, and pending litigation. PG&E Corporation and the Utility could be subject to additional investigations, regulatory proceedings or other enforcement actions as well as to additional litigation and claims by customers as a result of the Utility’s implementation of its PSPS program, including with respect to the October 9, 2019 PSPS event, which could result in fines, penalties, customer rebates or other payments. The amount of any fines, penalties, customer rebates or other payments (if PG&E Corporation or the Utility were to issue any credits, rebates or other payments in connection with any other PSPS events (whether past events or in the future)) or liability for damages could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. In addition, the PSPS program has had an adverse impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s reputation with customers, regulators and policymakers and future PSPS events may increase these negative perceptions. Risks Related to the Outcome of Other Enforcement Matters, Investigations, and Regulatory Proceedings PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results could be materially affected as a result of legislative and regulatory developments. The Utility’s financial results could be materially affected as a result of SB 901 adopted in 2018 by the California legislature. In December 2018, the CPUC opened an OIR in connection with SB 901 that will adopt criteria and a methodology for use by the CPUC in future applications for cost recovery of wildfire costs. After a CPUC July 8, 2019 decision determined that a utility that has filed for relief under Chapter 11 cannot access the CHT, on August 7, 2019, the Utility submitted to the CPUC an application for rehearing of that decision, the outcome of which is uncertain. Failure to obtain a substantial or full recovery of costs related to wildfires could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and cash flows. (See “Regulatory Matters - Other Regulatory Proceedings” in Item 7. MD&A.) In addition, SB 901 requires utilities to submit annual wildfire mitigation plans for approval by the CPUC on a schedule to be established by the CPUC. SB 901 establishes factors to be considered by the CPUC when setting penalties for failure to substantially comply with the plan. Failure to substantially comply with the plan could result in fines and other penalties imposed on the Utility that could be material. (See “Regulatory Matters - Other Regulatory Proceedings” in Item 7. MD&A.) On July 12, 2019, the California Governor signed into law AB 1054, which, among other policy reforms, provides for the establishment of a statewide fund that is 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. Although PG&E Corporation and the Utility have delivered notice to the CPUC electing to participate in the Wildfire Fund and even if the Utility were eligible to do so, the impact of AB 1054 on PG&E Corporation and the Utility is subject to numerous uncertainties, including the Utility’s ability to demonstrate to the CPUC that wildfire-related costs paid from the Wildfire Fund are just and reasonable, subject to a disallowance cap, and that the Wildfire Fund has sufficient remaining funds. The costs of participating in the Wildfire Fund (should the Utility be eligible to do so) are expected to exceed $6.7 billion over the anticipated ten-year life of the fund. The timing and amount of any potential charges associated with shareholder contributions would also depend on various factors, including the timing of resolution of the Chapter 11 Cases. In addition, there could also be a significant delay between the occurrence of a wildfire and the timing on which the Utility recognizes impairment for the reduction in future coverage, due to the lack of data available to the Utility following a catastrophic event, especially if the wildfire occurs in the service territory of another participating electric utility. Participation in the Wildfire Fund is expected to have a material impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and cash flows, and there can be no assurance that the benefits of participating in the Wildfire Fund ultimately outweigh these substantial costs. Finally, AB 1054 revised some of the SB 901 requirements regarding wildfire mitigation plans, including creating a Wildfire Safety Division to review future plans and that plans should cover a three-year period. Also, in June 2018, the State of California enacted the CCPA, which went into effect on January 1, 2020, with a 12-month look-back period requiring compliance by January 1, 2019. On October 11, 2019, the State of California announced proposed regulations which provide guidance on the requirements of the CCPA. The CCPA requires companies that process information on California residents to make new disclosures to consumers about their data collection, use and sharing practices, allows consumers to opt out of certain data sharing with third parties and provides a new cause of action for data breaches. The CCPA provides for financial penalties in the event of non-compliance and statutory damages in the event of a data security breach. Failure to comply with the CCPA could result in fines imposed on PG&E Corporation and the Utility that could be material. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected by the ability of PG&E Corporation and the Utility to participate in the Wildfire Fund under AB 1054, which is subject to numerous uncertainties and which could involve significant organizational or governance changes. The Utility’s ability to participate in the Wildfire Fund is subject to numerous eligibility and other requirements set forth in AB 1054, including, among others, (a) the Utility’s Chapter 11 Case has been resolved pursuant to a plan of reorganization by June 30, 2020, (b) the CPUC has approved the Utility’s plan of reorganization, including the Utility’s resulting governance structure as being acceptable in light of the Utility’s safety history, criminal probation, recent financial condition and other factors deemed relevant by the CPUC, and (c) the CPUC has determined that the Utility’s plan of reorganization is (i) consistent with California’s climate goals and (ii) neutral, on average, to the Utility’s ratepayers. (See “Assembly Bill 1054” in Item 7. MD&A.) There can be no assurance that PG&E Corporation and the Utility will be able to meet these eligibility and other requirements for participating in the Wildfire Fund, including that the CPUC will issue the necessary approvals or make the necessary determinations. On October 4, 2019, the CPUC issued an OII to consider the ratemaking and other implications “that will result from the confirmation of a plan of reorganization and other regulatory approvals necessary to resolve” the Chapter 11 Cases (the “Chapter 11 Proceedings OII”). The scope of the Chapter 11 Proceedings OII includes, among others, any regulatory approvals required in order for PG&E Corporation and the Utility to become eligible to participate in the Wildfire Fund and any other regulatory approvals required by AB 1054. PG&E Corporation and the Utility cannot predict the outcome of the Chapter 11 Proceedings OII. Additionally, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s ability to meet the eligibility and other requirements may be adversely impacted by the California Governor’s review of the Proposed Plan that PG&E Corporation and the Utility filed with the Bankruptcy Court on January 31, 2020. Failure to meet the eligibility conditions to access relief under the Wildfire Fund, including satisfaction of the eligibility requirements described above and the Utility making its initial contribution thereto, would preclude PG&E Corporation and the Utility from accessing the Wildfire Fund for future wildfire-related claims and any related benefits, including the disallowance cap, and could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Utility is subject to extensive regulations and the risk of enforcement proceedings in connection with compliance with such regulations. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected by the outcomes of the CPUC’s investigative enforcement proceedings against the Utility, other known enforcement matters, and other ongoing state and federal investigations and requests for information. The Utility is subject to extensive regulations, including federal, state and local energy, environmental and other laws and regulations, and the risk of enforcement proceedings in connection with compliance with such regulations. The Utility could incur material charges, including fines and other penalties, in connection with the Wildfires OII, the locate and mark OII, the order to show cause related to the 2019 PSPS events, the safety culture OII, and other matters that the CPUC’s SED may be investigating. The SED could launch investigations at any time on any issue it deems appropriate. Such proceedings are likely not subject to the automatic stay imposed as a result of the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases; however, collection efforts in connection with fines or penalties arising out of such proceedings are stayed. The SED has discretion whether to issue a penalty for each violation, but if it assesses a penalty for a violation, it may impose the maximum statutory penalty of $50,000, per penalty, per day, with an administrative limit of $8 million per citation issued. For offenses occurred after January 1, 2019, the maximum statutory penalty is $100,000, per penalty, per day. The SED may, at its discretion, impose penalties on a daily basis, or on less than a daily basis, for violations that continued for more than one day. The SED may also issue multiple citations per violation or address multiple violations in a single citation. While it is uncertain how the CPUC would calculate the number of violations or the penalty for any violations, such fines or penalties could be significant and materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s liquidity and results of operations. (See “Regulatory Environment” in Item 1. Business and Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8.) The Utility could be subject to additional regulatory or governmental enforcement action in the future with respect to compliance with federal, state or local laws, regulations or orders that could result in additional fines, penalties or customer refunds, including those regarding renewable energy and resource adequacy requirements; customer billing; customer service; affiliate transactions; vegetation management; design, construction, operating and maintenance practices; safety and inspection practices; compliance with CPUC general orders or other applicable CPUC decisions or regulations; federal electric reliability standards; and environmental compliance. CPUC staff could also impose penalties on the Utility in the future in accordance with its authority under the gas and electric safety citation programs. The amount of such fines, penalties, or customer refunds could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Utility also is a target of a number of investigations, in addition to certain investigations in connection with the wildfires. (See “Risks Related to Wildfires,” above.) The Utility is unable to predict the outcome of pending investigation, including whether any charges will be brought against the Utility, or the amount of any costs and expenses associated with such investigations. If these investigations result in enforcement action against the Utility, the Utility could incur additional fines or penalties the amount of which could be substantial and, in the event of a judgment against the Utility, suffer further ongoing negative consequences. Furthermore, a negative outcome in any of these investigations, or future enforcement actions, could negatively affect the outcome of future ratemaking and regulatory proceedings to which the Utility may be subject; for example, by enabling parties to challenge the Utility’s request to recover costs that the parties allege are somehow related to the Utility’s violations. (See also “PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected in the event of non-compliance with the terms of probation or in the event of modifications to the conditions of probation” above.) PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results primarily depend on the outcomes of regulatory and ratemaking proceedings and the Utility’s ability to manage its operating expenses and capital expenditures so that it is able to earn its authorized rate of return in a timely manner. As a regulated entity, the Utility’s rates are set by the CPUC or the FERC on a prospective basis and are generally designed to allow the Utility to collect sufficient revenues to recover reasonable costs of providing service, including a return on its capital investments. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results could be materially affected if the CPUC or the FERC does not authorize sufficient revenues for the Utility to safely and reliably serve its customers and earn its authorized ROE. The outcome of the Utility’s ratemaking proceedings can be affected by many factors, including the level of opposition by intervening parties; potential rate impacts; increasing levels of regulatory review; changes in the political, regulatory, or legislative environments; and the opinions of the Utility’s regulators, consumer and other stakeholder organizations, and customers, about the Utility’s ability to provide safe, reliable, and affordable electric and gas services. Further, an increase in the amount of capacity located in the Utility’s service territory that is procured by the CAISO under Reliability Must Run (“RMR”) contracts could increase the Utility’s costs of procuring capacity needed for reliable service to its customers. In addition to the amount of authorized revenues, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results could be materially affected if the Utility’s actual costs to safely and reliably serve its customers differ from authorized or forecast costs. The Utility may incur additional costs for many reasons including changing market circumstances, unanticipated events (such as wildfires, storms, earthquakes, accidents, or catastrophic or other events affecting the Utility’s operations), or compliance with new state laws or policies. Although the Utility may be allowed to recover some or all of the additional costs, there may be a substantial delay between when the Utility incurs the costs and when the Utility is authorized to collect revenues to recover such costs. Alternatively, the CPUC or the FERC may disallow costs that they determine were not reasonably or prudently incurred by the Utility. The Utility also is required to incur costs to comply with legislative and regulatory requirements and initiatives, such as those relating to the development of a state-wide electric vehicle charging infrastructure, the deployment of distributed energy resources, implementation of demand response and customer energy efficiency programs, energy storage and renewable energy targets, underground gas storage, and the construction of the California high-speed rail project. The Utility’s ability to recover costs, including its investments, associated with these and other legislative and regulatory initiatives will depend, in large part, on the final form of legislative or regulatory requirements, and the associated ratemaking mechanisms associated with these initiatives, including the timely adjustment of such mechanisms to reflect any lowered customer demand for the Utility’s electricity and natural gas services. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results depend upon the Utility’s continuing ability to recover “pass-through” costs, including electricity and natural gas procurement costs, from customers in a timely manner. The CPUC may disallow procurement costs for a variety of reasons. In addition, the Utility’s ability to recover these costs could be affected by the loss of Utility customers and decreased new customer growth, if the CPUC fails to adjust the Utility’s rates to reflect such events. The Utility meets customer demand for electricity from a variety of sources, including electricity generated from the Utility’s own generation facilities, electricity provided by third parties under power purchase agreements, and purchases on the wholesale electricity market. The Utility must manage these sources using the commercial and CPUC regulatory principles of “least cost dispatch” and prudent administration of power purchase agreements in compliance with its CPUC-approved long-term procurement plan. The CPUC could disallow procurement costs incurred by the Utility if the CPUC determines that the Utility did not comply with these principles or if the Utility did not comply with its procurement plan. Further, the contractual prices for electricity under the Utility’s current or future power purchase agreements could become uneconomic in the future for a variety of reasons, including developments in alternative energy technology, increased self-generation by customers, an increase in distributed generation, and lower customer demand due to adverse economic conditions or the loss of the Utility’s customers to other retail providers. Despite the CPUC’s current approval of the contracts, the CPUC could disallow contract costs in the future if it determines that the terms of such contracts, including price, do not meet the CPUC reasonableness standard. The Utility’s ability to recover the costs it incurs in the wholesale electricity market may be affected by whether the CAISO wholesale electricity market continues to function effectively. Although market mechanisms are designed to limit excessive prices, these market mechanisms could fail, or the related systems and software on which the market mechanisms rely may not perform as intended which could result in excessive market prices. The CPUC could prohibit the Utility from passing through the higher costs of electricity to customers. Further, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results could be affected by the loss of Utility customers and decreasing bundled load that occurs through municipalization of the Utility’s facilities, an increase in the number of CCAs that provide electricity to their residents, and an increase in the number of consumers who become direct access customers of alternative generation providers. (See “Competition in the Electricity Industry” in Item 1.) As the number of bundled customers (i.e., those customers who receive electricity and distribution service from the Utility) declines, the rates for remaining customers could increase as the Utility would have a smaller customer base from which to recover certain procurement costs. Although the Utility is permitted to collect non-bypassable charges for above market generation-related costs incurred on behalf of former customers, the charges may not be sufficient for the Utility to fully recover these costs. In addition, the Utility’s ability to collect non-bypassable charges has been, and may continue to be, challenged by certain customer groups. Furthermore, if the former customers return to receiving electricity supply from the Utility, the Utility could incur costs to meet their electricity needs that it may not be able to timely recover through rates or that it may not be able to recover at all. In addition, increasing levels of self-generation of electricity by customers (primarily solar installations) and the use of customer NEM, which allows self-generating customers to receive bill credits for surplus power at the full retail rate, puts upward rate pressure on remaining customers, who may incur significantly higher bills due to an increase in customers seeking alternative energy providers. A confluence of technology-related cost declines and sustained federal or state subsidies could make a combination of distributed generation and energy storage a viable, cost-effective alternative to the Utility’s bundled electric service which could further threaten the Utility’s ability to recover its generation, transmission, and distribution investments. If the number of the Utility’s customers decreases or grows at a slower rate than anticipated, the Utility’s level of authorized capital investment could decline as well, leading to a slower growth in rate base and earnings. Reduced energy demand or significantly slowed growth in demand due to customer migration to other energy providers, adoption of energy efficient technology, conservation, increasing levels of distributed generation and self-generation, unless substantially offset through regulatory cost allocations, could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. Further, changes in commodity prices also may have an adverse effect on the Utility’s ability to timely recover its operating costs and earn its authorized ROE. Although the Utility generally recovers its electricity and natural gas procurement costs from customers as “pass-through” costs, a significant and sustained rise in commodity prices could create overall rate pressures that make it more difficult for the Utility to recover its costs that are not categorized as “pass-through” costs. To relieve some of this upward rate pressure, the CPUC could authorize lower revenues than the Utility requested or disallow full cost recovery. If the Utility is unable to recover a material portion of its procurement costs and/or if the CPUC fails to adjust the Utility’s rates to reflect the impact of changing loads, the wide deployment of distributed generation, and the development of new electricity generation and energy storage technologies, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. Risks Related to Operations and Information Technology The Utility’s electricity and natural gas operations are inherently hazardous and involve significant risks which, if they materialize, can materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Utility owns and operates extensive electricity and natural gas facilities, including two nuclear generation units and an extensive hydroelectric generating system. (See “Electric Utility Operations” and “Natural Gas Utility Operations” in Item 1. Business above.) The Utility’s ability to earn its authorized ROE depends on its ability to efficiently maintain, operate, and protect its facilities, and provide electricity and natural gas services safely and reliably. The Utility undertakes substantial capital investment projects to construct, replace, and improve its electricity and natural gas facilities. In addition, the Utility is obligated to decommission its electricity generation facilities at the end of their useful operating lives, and the CPUC approved retirement of Diablo Canyon by 2024 and 2025. The Utility’s ability to safely and reliably operate, maintain, construct and decommission its facilities is subject to numerous risks, many of which are beyond the Utility’s control, including those that arise from: •the breakdown or failure of equipment, electric transmission or distribution lines, or natural gas transmission and distribution pipelines or other assets or group of assets, that can cause explosions, fires, public or workforce safety issues, large scale system disruption or other catastrophic events; •an overpressure event occurring on natural gas facilities due to equipment failure, incorrect operating procedures or failure to follow correct operating procedures, or welding or fabrication-related defects, that results in the failure of downstream transmission pipelines or distribution assets and uncontained natural gas flow; •the failure to maintain adequate capacity to meet customer demand on the gas system that results in customer curtailments, controlled/uncontrolled gas outages, gas surges back into homes, serious personal injury or loss of life; •a prolonged statewide electrical black-out that results in damage to the Utility’s equipment or damage to property owned by customers or other third parties; •the failure to fully identify, evaluate, and control workplace hazards that result in serious injury or loss of life for employees or the public, environmental damage, or reputational damage; •the release of radioactive materials caused by a nuclear accident, seismic activity, natural disaster, or terrorist act; •the failure of a large dam or other major hydroelectric facility, or the failure of one or more levees that protect land on which the Utility’s assets are built; •the failure to take expeditious or sufficient action to mitigate operating conditions, facilities, or equipment, that the Utility has identified, or reasonably should have identified, as unsafe, which failure then leads to a catastrophic event (such as a wildfire or natural gas explosion); •inadequate emergency preparedness plans and the failure to respond effectively to a catastrophic event that can lead to public or employee harm or extended outages; •operator or other human error; •a motor vehicle incident involving a Utility vehicle (or one operated on behalf of the Utility) resulting in serious injuries to or fatalities of the workforce or the public, property damage, or other consequences; •an ineffective records management program that results in the failure to construct, operate and maintain a utility system safely and prudently; •construction performed by third parties that damages the Utility’s underground or overhead facilities, including, for example, ground excavations or “dig-ins” that damage the Utility’s underground pipelines; •the release of hazardous or toxic substances into the air, water, or soil, including, for example, gas leaks from natural gas storage facilities; flaking lead-based paint from the Utility’s facilities, and leaking or spilled insulating fluid from electrical equipment; and •attacks by third parties, including cyber-attacks, acts of terrorism, vandalism, or war. The occurrence of any of these events could interrupt fuel supplies; affect demand for electricity or natural gas; cause unplanned outages or reduce generating output; damage the Utility’s assets or operations; damage the assets or operations of third parties on which the Utility relies; damage property owned by customers or others; and cause personal injury or death. As a result, the Utility could incur costs to purchase replacement power, to repair assets and restore service, and to compensate third parties. Any of such incidents also could lead to significant claims against the Utility. The adverse impact of the occurrence of any of these events may be exacerbated by the difficulty PG&E Corporation and the Utility may experience in making sufficient capital expenditure as a result of the Chapter 11 Cases. For the duration of the Chapter 11 Cases, the Utility’s ability to finance capital expenditures and pay other ongoing expenses will primarily depend on the levels of its operating cash flows and availability under the DIP Credit Agreement. In the event that PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s capital needs increase materially due to unexpected events or transactions including but not limited to the events described above, additional financing outside of the DIP Facilities may be required, and there can be no assurance that PG&E Corporation and the Utility will be able to obtain such additional financing on favorable terms or at all, or that such additional financing will be approved by the Bankruptcy Court. In the event that PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to obtain such additional financing on favorable terms or at all, or are unable to obtain Bankruptcy Court approval of such additional financing, PG&E Corporation and the Utility may be unable to make necessary capital expenditures in connection with the occurrence of any of the above events. For more information on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s material commitments for capital expenditures, see “Regulatory Matters” in Item 7. MD&A. Further, although the Utility often enters into agreements for third-party contractors to perform work, such as patrolling and inspection of facilities, vegetation management, or the construction or demolition or facilities, the Utility may retain liability for the quality and completion of the contractor’s work and can be subject to penalties or other enforcement action if the contractor violates applicable laws, rules, regulations, or orders. The Utility may also be subject to liability, penalties or other enforcement action as a result of personal injury or death caused by third-party contractor actions. Insurance, equipment warranties, or other contractual indemnification requirements may not be sufficient or effective to provide full or even partial recovery under all circumstances or against all hazards or liabilities to which the Utility may become subject. An uninsured loss could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Utility’s insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover losses caused by an operating failure or catastrophic events, including severe weather events, or may not be available at a reasonable cost, or available at all. The Utility has experienced increased costs and difficulties in obtaining insurance coverage for wildfires and other risks that could arise from the Utility’s ordinary operations. PG&E Corporation, the Utility or its contractors and customers could continue to experience coverage reductions and/or increased insurance costs in future years. No assurance can be given that future losses will not exceed the limits of the Utility’s insurance coverage. Uninsured losses and increases in the cost of insurance may not be recoverable in customer rates. A loss that is not fully insured or cannot be recovered in customer rates could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. As a result of the potential application to investor-owned utilities of a strict liability standard under the doctrine of inverse condemnation, recent losses recorded by insurance companies, the risk of increased wildfires including as a result of climate change, the 2019 Kincade fire, the 2018 Camp fire, the 2017 Northern California wildfires, and the 2015 Butte fire, the Utility may not be able to obtain sufficient insurance coverage in the future at a reasonable cost, or at all. In addition, the Utility is unable to predict whether it would be allowed to recover in rates the increased costs of insurance or the costs of any uninsured losses. If the amount of insurance is insufficient or otherwise unavailable, or if the Utility is unable to obtain insurance at a reasonable cost or recover in rates the costs of any uninsured losses, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. The electric power and gas industries are undergoing significant changes driven by technological advancements and a decarbonized economy, which could materially affect the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The electric power industry is undergoing transformative change driven by technological advancements enabling customer choice (for example, customer-owned generation and energy storage) and state climate policy supporting a decarbonized economy. The electric grid is a critical enabler of the adoption of new energy technologies that support California’s climate change and GHG reduction objectives, which continue to be publicly supported by California policymakers. California's environmental policy objectives are accelerating the pace and scope of the industry change. For instance, SB 100, which was signed into law on September 10, 2018, increases from 50% to 60%, the percentage of California’s electricity portfolio that must come from renewables by 2030. SB 100 establishes a further goal to have an electric grid that is entirely powered by clean energy by 2045. California utilities also are experiencing increasing deployment by customers and third parties of DERs, such as on-site solar generation, energy storage, fuel cells, energy efficiency, and demand response technologies. These developments will require modernization of the electric distribution grid to, among other things, accommodate two-way flows of electricity, increase the grid’s capacity, and interconnect DERs. In order to enable the California clean energy economy, sustained investments are required in grid modernization, renewable integration projects, energy efficiency programs, energy storage options, EV infrastructure and state infrastructure modernization (e.g., rail and water projects). To this end, the CPUC is conducting proceedings to: evaluate changes to the planning and operation of the electric distribution grid in order to prepare for higher penetration of DERs and, consider future grid modernization and grid reinforcement investments; evaluate if traditional grid investments can be deferred by DERs, and if feasible, what, if any, compensation to utilities would be appropriate for enabling those investments; and clarify the role of the electric distribution grid operator. The CPUC also authorized development of two new, five-year programs aimed at accelerating widespread electric vehicle adoption and combating climate change. The new programs will increase fast charging options for consumers as well as electric charging infrastructure for non-light-duty fleet vehicles. In addition, in light of the state’s commitment to clean energy and carbon neutral economy by 2045, California has recently proposed public policies that prohibit or restrict the use and consumption of natural gas, for example in buildings, that will have for effect to reduce the use of natural gas. Reducing natural gas use could lead to a reduction in the gas customer base and a diminished need for gas infrastructure and, as a result, could lead to certain gas assets no longer be “used and useful,” potentially causing substantial investment value of gas assets to be stranded. (Under the CPUC rules, when an asset no longer meets the standard of “used and useful,” the utility no longer recovers the costs from its customers or earns the associated rate of return.) However, while natural gas demand is projected to decline over time, the costs of operating a safe and reliable gas delivery system in California have been increasing, among other things, to cover the cost of long-term pipeline safety enhancements. Inability by the Utility to recover in rates its investments into the natural gas system while still ensuring gas system safety and reliability could materially affect the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The industry changes, costs associated with complying with new regulatory developments and initiatives and with technological advancements, or the Utility’s inability to successfully adapt to changes in the electric and gas industry, could materially affect the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. A cyber incident, cyber security breach, severe natural event or physical attack on the Utility’s operational networks and information technology systems could have a material effect on its financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Utility’s electricity and natural gas systems rely on a complex, interconnected network of generation, transmission, distribution, control, and communication technologies, which can be damaged by natural events-such as severe weather or seismic events-and by malicious events, such as cyber and physical attacks. Private and public entities, such as the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, and U.S. Government Departments, including the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security and Energy, and the White House, have noted that cyber-attacks targeting utility systems are increasing in sophistication, magnitude, and frequency. The Utility’s operational networks also may face new cyber security risks due to modernizing and interconnecting the existing infrastructure with new technologies and control systems. Any failure or decrease in the functionality of the Utility’s operational networks could cause harm to the public or employees, significantly disrupt operations, negatively impact the Utility’s ability to safely generate, transport, deliver and store energy and gas or otherwise operate in the most safe and efficient manner or at all, and damage the Utility’s assets or operations or those of third parties. The Utility also relies on complex information technology systems that allow it to create, collect, use, disclose, store and otherwise process sensitive information, including the Utility’s financial information, customer energy usage and billing information, and personal information regarding customers, employees and their dependents, contractors, and other individuals. In addition, the Utility often relies on third-party vendors to host, maintain, modify, and update its systems, and to provide other services to the Utility or the Utility’s customers. In addition, the Utility is increasingly being required to disclose large amounts of data (including customer energy usage and personal information regarding customers) to support changes to California’s electricity market related to grid modernization and customer choice. These third-party vendors could cease to exist, fail to establish adequate processes to protect the Utility’s systems and information, or experience security incidents or inadequate security measures. Any incidents or disruptions in the Utility’s information technology systems could impact the Utility’s ability to track or collect revenues and to maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting. The Utility and its third-party vendors have been subject to, and will likely continue to be subject to, breaches and attempts to gain unauthorized access to the Utility’s information technology systems or confidential data (including information about customers and employees), or to disrupt the Utility’s operations. None of these breaches or attempts has individually or in the aggregate resulted in a security incident with a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. Despite implementation of security and control measures, there can be no assurance that the Utility will be able to prevent unauthorized access to its operational networks, information technology systems or data, or the disruption of its operations. Such events could subject the Utility to significant expenses, claims by customers or third parties, government inquiries, penalties for violation of applicable privacy laws, investigations, and regulatory actions that could result in material fines and penalties, loss of customers and harm to PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s reputation, any of which could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Utility maintains cyber liability insurance that covers certain damages caused by cyber incidents. However, there is no guarantee that adequate insurance will continue to be available at rates the Utility believes are reasonable or that the costs of responding to and recovering from a cyber incident will be covered by insurance or recoverable in rates. The operation and decommissioning of the Utility’s nuclear generation facilities expose it to potentially significant liabilities and the Utility may not be able to fully recover its costs if regulatory requirements change or the facilities cease operations before the licenses expire. The operation of the Utility’s nuclear generation facilities exposes it to potentially significant liabilities from environmental, health and financial risks, such as risks relating to the storage, handling and disposal of spent nuclear fuel, and the release of radioactive materials caused by a nuclear accident, seismic activity, natural disaster, or terrorist act. If the Utility incurs losses that are either not covered by insurance or exceed the amount of insurance available, such losses could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. In addition, the Utility may be required under federal law to pay up to $275 million of liabilities arising out of each nuclear incident occurring not only at the Utility’s Diablo Canyon facility but at any other nuclear power plant in the United States. On January 11, 2018, the CPUC approved the retirement of Diablo Canyon units by 2024 and 2025. However, the Utility continues to face public concern about the safety of nuclear generation and nuclear fuel. Some of these nuclear opposition groups regularly file petitions at the NRC and in other forums challenging the actions of the NRC and urging governmental entities to adopt laws or policies in opposition to nuclear power. Although an action in opposition may ultimately fail, regulatory proceedings may take longer to conclude and be more costly to complete. It is also possible that public pressure could grow leading to adverse changes in legislation, regulations, orders, or their interpretation. As a result, operations at the Utility’s two nuclear generation units at Diablo Canyon could cease before their respective licenses expire in 2024 and 2025. In such an instance, the Utility could be required to record a charge for the remaining amount of its unrecovered investment and such charge could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. In addition, in order to retain highly skilled personnel necessary to safely operate Diablo Canyon during the remaining years of operations, the Utility will incur costs in connection with (i) an employee retention program to ensure adequate staffing levels at Diablo Canyon, which program has been approved by the CPUC, and (ii) an employee retraining and development program, to facilitate redeployment of a portion of Diablo Canyon personnel to the decommissioning project and elsewhere in the Utility. There can be no assurance that the Utility will be successful in retaining highly skilled personnel under its employee programs. The Utility has incurred, and may continue to incur, substantial costs to comply with NRC regulations and orders. (See “Regulatory Environment” in Item 1. Business above.) If the Utility were unable to recover these costs, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results could be materially affected. The Utility may determine that it cannot comply with the new regulations or orders in a feasible and economic manner and voluntarily cease operations; alternatively, the NRC may order the Utility to cease operations until the Utility can comply with new regulations, orders, or decisions. The Utility may incur a material charge if it ceases operations at Diablo Canyon’s two nuclear generation units before their respective licenses expire in 2024 and 2025. At December 31, 2019, the Utility’s unrecovered investment in Diablo Canyon was $1.6 billion. The Utility also has an obligation to decommission its electricity generation facilities, including its nuclear facilities, as well as gas transmission system assets, at the end of their useful lives. (See Note 3: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies - “Asset Retirement Obligations” of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statement in Item 8.) The CPUC authorizes the Utility to recover its estimated costs to decommission its nuclear facilities through nuclear decommissioning charges that are collected from customers and held in nuclear decommissioning trusts to be used for the eventual decommissioning of each nuclear unit. If the Utility’s actual decommissioning costs, including the amounts held in the nuclear decommissioning trusts, exceed estimated costs, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. For certain critical technologies, products and services, the Utility relies on a limited number of suppliers and, in some cases, sole suppliers. In the event these suppliers are unable to perform, the Utility could experience delays and disruptions in its operations while it transitions to alternative plans or suppliers. The Utility relies on a limited number of sole source suppliers for certain of its technologies, products and services. Although the Utility has long-term agreements with such suppliers, if the suppliers are unable to deliver these technologies, products or services, the Utility could experience delays and disruptions while it implements alternative plans and makes arrangements with acceptable substitute suppliers. As a result, the Utility’s business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially affected. As an example, the Utility relies on Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (acquired in 2018 by Brookfield Business Partners L.P.) for its nuclear fuel assemblies, and Silver Spring Networks, Inc. and Aclara Technologies LLC as suppliers of proprietary SmartMeter™ devices and software, and of managed services, utilized in its advanced metering system that collects electric and natural gas usage data from customers. If these suppliers encounter performance difficulties or are unable to supply these devices or maintain and update their software, or provide other services to maintain these systems, the Utility’s metering, billing, and electric network operations could be impacted and disrupted. The Utility may be required to incur substantial costs in order to obtain or renew licenses and permits needed to operate the Utility’s business and the Utility may be subject to fines and penalties for failure to comply or obtain license renewal. The Utility must comply with the terms of various governmental permits, authorizations, and licenses, including those issued by the FERC for the continued operation of the Utility’s hydroelectric generation facilities, and those issued by environmental and other federal, state and local governmental agencies. Many of the Utility’s capital investment projects, and some maintenance activities, often require the Utility to obtain land use, construction, environmental, or other governmental permits. These permits, authorizations, and licenses may be difficult to obtain on a timely basis, causing work delays. Further, existing permits and licenses could be revoked or modified by the agencies that granted them if facts develop that differ significantly from the facts assumed when they were issued. In addition, the Utility often seeks periodic renewal of a license or permit, such as a waste discharge permit or a FERC operating license for a hydroelectric generation facility. If a license or permit is not renewed for a particular facility and the Utility is required to cease operations at that facility, the Utility could incur an impairment charge or other costs. Before renewing a permit or license, the issuing agency may impose additional requirements that may increase the Utility’s compliance costs. In particular, in connection with a license renewal for one or more of the Utility’s hydroelectric generation facilities or assets, the FERC may impose new license conditions that could, among other things, require increased expenditures or result in reduced electricity output and/or capacity at the facility. In addition, local governments may attempt to assert jurisdiction over various utility operations by requiring permits or other approvals that the Utility has not been previously required to obtain. The Utility may incur penalties and sanctions for failure to comply with the terms and conditions of licenses and permits which could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. If the Utility cannot obtain, renew, or comply with necessary governmental permits, authorizations, licenses, ordinances, or other requirements, or if the Utility cannot recover the increase in associated compliance and other costs in a timely manner, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. Risks Related to Environmental Factors Severe weather conditions, extended drought and shifting climate patterns could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. Extreme weather, prior extended drought and shifting climate patterns have intensified the challenges associated with wildfire management in California. The Utility’s service territory encompasses some of the most densely forested areas in California and, as a consequence, is subject to higher risk from vegetation-related ignition events than other California IOUs. Further, environmental extremes, such as prior drought conditions followed by periods of wet weather, can drive additional vegetation growth (which can then fuel fires) and influence both the likelihood and severity of extraordinary wildfire events. In California, over the past five years, inconsistent and extreme precipitation, coupled with more hot days, have increased the wildfire risk and made wildfire outbreaks increasingly difficult to manage. In particular, the risk posed by wildfires has increased in the Utility’s service area as a result of a prior extended period of drought, bark beetle infestations in the California forest and wildfire fuel increases due to record rainfall following the drought, and strong wind events, among other environmental factors. Contributing factors other than environmental can include local land use policies and historical forestry management practices. The combined effects of extreme weather and climate change also impact this risk. For example, in 2017, there were nearly double the number of wildfires in California than the annual average, including five of the most devastating wildfires in California’s history. On January 19, 2018, the CPUC approved a statewide fire-threat map that shows that approximately half of the Utility’s service territory is facing “elevated” or “extreme” fire danger. Approximately 25,000 circuit miles of the Utility’s nearly 81,000 distribution overhead circuit miles and approximately 5,500 miles of the nearly 18,000 transmission overhead circuit miles are in such high-fire threat areas, significantly more in total than other California IOUs. Severe weather events and other natural disasters, including wildfires and other fires, storms, tornadoes, floods, heat waves, drought, earthquakes, tsunamis, rising sea levels, pandemics, solar events, electromagnetic events, or other natural disasters such as wildfires, could result in severe business disruptions, prolonged power outages, property damage, injuries or loss of life, significant decreases in revenues and earnings, and/or significant additional costs to PG&E Corporation and the Utility. Any such event could have a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. Any of such events also could lead to significant claims against the Utility. Further, these events could result in regulatory penalties and disallowances, particularly if the Utility encounters difficulties in restoring power to its customers on a timely basis or if the related losses are found to be the result of the Utility’s practices and/or the failure of electric and other equipment of the Utility. Further, the Utility has been studying the potential effects of climate change (increased temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, rising sea levels) on the Utility’s operations and is developing contingency plans to adapt to those events and conditions that the Utility believes are most significant. Scientists project that climate change will increase electricity demand due to more extreme, persistent and hot weather. As a result, the Utility’s hydroelectric generation could change and the Utility would need to consider managing or acquiring additional generation. If the Utility increases its reliance on conventional generation resources to replace hydroelectric generation and to meet increased customer demand, it may become more costly for the Utility to comply with GHG emissions limits. In addition, flooding caused by rising sea levels could damage the Utility’s facilities, including gas, generation, and electric transmission and distribution assets. The Utility could incur substantial costs to repair or replace facilities, restore service, or compensate customers and other third parties for damages or injuries. The Utility anticipates that the increased costs would be recovered through rates, but as rate pressures increase, the likelihood of disallowance or non-recovery may increase. Events or conditions caused by climate change could have a greater impact on the Utility’s operations than the Utility’s studies suggest and could result in lower revenues or increased expenses, or both. If the CPUC fails to adjust the Utility’s rates to reflect the impact of events or conditions caused by climate change, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. The Utility’s operations are subject to extensive environmental laws and changes in or liabilities under these laws could adversely affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results. The Utility’s operations are subject to extensive federal, state, and local environmental laws, regulations, and orders, relating to air quality, water quality and usage, remediation of hazardous wastes, and the protection and conservation of natural resources and wildlife. The Utility incurs significant capital, operating, and other costs associated with compliance with these environmental statutes, rules, and regulations. The Utility has been in the past, and may be in the future, required to pay for environmental remediation costs at sites where it is identified as a potentially responsible party under federal and state environmental laws. Although the Utility has recorded liabilities for known environmental obligations, these costs can be difficult to estimate due to uncertainties about the extent of contamination, remediation alternatives, the applicable remediation levels, and the financial ability of other potentially responsible parties. (For more information, see Note 15 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8.) Environmental remediation costs could increase in the future as a result of new legislation, the current trend toward more stringent standards, and stricter and more expansive application of existing environmental regulations. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations, or failure to comply with the terms of licenses or permits issued by environmental or regulatory agencies, could expose the Utility to claims by third parties or the imposition of civil or criminal fines or other sanctions. The CPUC has authorized the Utility to recover its environmental remediation costs for certain sites through various ratemaking mechanisms. One of these mechanisms allows the Utility rate recovery for 90% of its hazardous substance remediation costs for certain approved sites without a reasonableness review. The CPUC may discontinue or change these ratemaking mechanisms in the future or the Utility may incur environmental costs that exceed amounts the CPUC has authorized the Utility to recover in rates. Some of the Utility’s environmental costs, such as the remediation costs associated with the Hinkley natural gas compressor site, are not recoverable through rates or insurance. (See “Environmental Regulation” in Item 1. and Note 15 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8.) The Utility’s costs to remediate groundwater contamination near the Hinkley natural gas compressor site and to abate the effects of the contamination have had, and may continue to have, a material effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial results. Their financial results also can be materially affected by changes in estimated costs and by the extent to which actual remediation costs differ from recorded liabilities. State climate policy requires reductions in greenhouse gases of 40% by 2030 and 80% by 2050. Various proposals for addressing these reductions have the potential to reduce natural gas usage and increase natural gas costs, which may impact the future of natural gas services. The future recovery of the increased costs associated with compliance is uncertain. The CARB is the state’s primary regulator for GHG emission reduction programs. Natural gas providers have been subject to compliance with CARB’s Cap-and-Trade Program since 2015, and natural gas end-use customers have an increasing exposure to carbon costs under the Program through 2030 when the full cost will be reflected in customer bills. CARB’s Scoping Plan also proposes various methods of reducing GHG emissions from natural gas. These include more aggressive energy efficiency programs to reduce natural gas end use, increased renewable portfolio standards generation in the electric sector reducing noncore gas load, and replacement of natural gas appliances with electric appliances, leading to further reduced demand. These natural gas load reductions may be partially offset by CARB’s proposals to deploy natural gas to replace wood fuel in home heating and diesel in transportation applications. CARB also proposes a displacement of some conventional natural gas with above-market renewable natural gas. The combination of reduced load and increased costs could result in higher natural gas customer bills and a potential mandate to deliver renewable natural gas could lead to cost recovery risk. In addition, local city governments have passed ordinances restricting use of natural gas in new construction, and if other jurisdictions follow suit, this could affect future demand for the provision of natural gas. Other Risk Factors Poor investment performance or other factors could require PG&E Corporation and the Utility to make significant unplanned contributions to its pension plan, other postretirement benefits plans, and nuclear decommissioning trusts. PG&E Corporation and the Utility provide defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefits for eligible employees and retirees. The Utility also maintains three trusts for the purposes of providing funds to decommission its nuclear facilities. The performance of the debt and equity markets affects the value of plan assets and trust assets. A decline in the market value may increase the funding requirements for these plans and trusts. The cost of providing pension and other postretirement benefits is also affected by other factors, including interest rates used to measure the required minimum funding levels, the rate of return on plan assets, employee demographics, discount rates used in determining future benefit obligations, rates of increase in health care costs, future government regulation, and prior contributions to the plans. Similarly, funding requirements for the nuclear decommissioning trusts are affected by the rates of return on trust assets, changes in the laws or regulations regarding nuclear decommissioning or decommissioning funding requirements as well as changes in assumptions or forecasts related to decommissioning dates, technology and the cost of labor, materials and equipment. (See Note 3: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8.) If the Utility is required to make significant unplanned contributions to fund the pension and postretirement plans or if actual nuclear decommissioning costs exceed the amount of nuclear decommissioning trust funds and the Utility is unable to recover the contributions or additional costs in rates, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows could be materially affected. The Utility’s success depends on the availability of the services of a qualified workforce and its ability to maintain satisfactory collective bargaining agreements which cover a substantial number of employees. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s results may suffer if the Utility is unable to attract and retain qualified personnel and senior management talent, or if prolonged labor disruptions occur. The Utility’s workforce is aging and many employees are or will become eligible to retire within the next few years. Although the Utility has undertaken efforts to recruit and train new field service personnel, the Utility may be faced with a shortage of experienced and qualified personnel. The majority of the Utility’s employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements with three unions. Labor disruptions could occur depending on the outcome of negotiations to renew the terms of these agreements with the unions or if tentative new agreements are not ratified by their members. In addition, some of the remaining non-represented Utility employees could join one of these unions in the future. PG&E Corporation and the Utility also may face challenges in attracting and retaining senior management talent especially if they are unable to restore the reputational harm generated by the negative publicity stemming from the ongoing enforcement proceedings and the Chapter 11 Cases. Any such occurrences could materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, and cash flows. The Utility’s business activities are concentrated in one region, as a result of which, its future performance may be affected by events and factors unique to California. The Utility’s business activities are concentrated in Northern California. As a result, the Utility’s future performance may be affected by events and economic factors unique to California or by regional regulation or legislation, including, for example, the doctrine of inverse condemnation. (See “The doctrine of inverse condemnation, if applied by courts in litigation to which PG&E Corporation and the Utility are subject, could significantly expand the potential liabilities from such litigation and materially affect PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and cash flows” above.) ITEM 1B.