PG&E 2014 Annual Report Download - page 42

34
The Utility entered a plea of not guilty. The Utility believes that criminal charges and the alternate fine allegations are not
merited and that it did not knowingly and willfully violate minimum safety standards under the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act or
obstruct the NTSB’s investigation, as alleged in the superseding indictment. A status conference is scheduled to be held in court on
March 9, 2015. PG&E Corporation and the Utility have not accrued any charges for criminal fines in their consolidated financial
statements as such amounts are not considered to be probable.
Litigation Related to the San Bruno Accident and Natural Gas Spending
At December 31, 2014, there were also five purported shareholder derivative lawsuits outstanding against PG&E
Corporation and the Utility seeking recovery on behalf of PG&E Corporation and the Utility for alleged breaches of fiduciary
duty by officers and directors, among other claims. The plaintiffs for three of these lawsuits filed a consolidated complaint with
the San Mateo County Superior Court in November 2013, which has been amended to add a fourth shareholder plaintiff and to
discuss recent events, including the federal criminal indictment discussed above. In August 2014, the judge lifted the stay on the
consolidated complaint for the limited purpose of allowing briefing and hearing on demurrers (state court motions to dismiss).
On September 15, 2014, PG&E Corporation, the Utility and the individual defendants asked the court to dismiss the consolidated
complaint because the plaintiffs (1) failed to demand that the Boards of Directors pursue claims against the defendant directors and
officers and (2) have not adequately pled why such demand should be excused. The court has since clarified that the appropriate
board on whom the plaintiffs should have demanded with respect to the claims in the operative complaint is the 2013 PG&E
Corporation Board of Directors (and the 2014 Board regarding the allegations first raised in plaintiffs’ 2014 amended consolidated
complaint). The Court has invited plaintiffs to amend their complaint to accommodate this clarification, and defendants to refile a
demurrer on this amended complaint if they so choose. Accordingly, briefing and litigation on this motion is expected to continue
through the first quarter of 2015. On September 22, 2014, PG&E Corporation, the Utility, and the individual defendants filed a
petition with the California Court of Appeal requesting a new order continuing the stay until resolution of the federal criminal
indictment discussed above. A fifth purported shareholder derivative lawsuit that was filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California remains stayed.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable.
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANTS
The following individuals serve as executive officers (1) of PG&E Corporation and/or the Utility, as of February 10,
2015. Except as otherwise noted, all positions have been held at Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
Name Age Positions Held Over Last Five Years Time in Position
Anthony F. Earley, Jr. 65 Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Ofcer,
and President, PG&E Corporation
September 13, 2011 to present
Executive Chairman of the Board, DTE Energy
Company
October 1, 2010 to September 12,
2011
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Ofcer, DTE Energy Company
August 1998 to September 30,
2010
Christopher P. Johns 54 President August 1, 2009 to present
Senior Vice President, Financial Services May 1, 2009 to July 31, 2009
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Ofcer,
PG&E Corporation
May 1, 2009 to July 31, 2009
Nickolas Stavropoulos 56 Executive Vice President, Gas Operations June 13, 2011 to present
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating
Ofcer, U.S. Gas Distribution, National Grid
August 2007 to March 31, 2011
Geisha J. Williams 53 Executive Vice President, Electric Operations June 1, 2011 to present
Senior Vice President, Energy Delivery December 1, 2007 to May 31, 2011