mean totally out? >> it is actually both. these are the number of tickets we have in the queue to be repaired either from the burnout or and on off situation. it was stated at earlier that there were 30 days to make repairs. we did have significant opportunity to improve but i'm not sure that accurately reflected the time it took to make the repairs. i think there were some reporting back to 311 as well as our own internal reporting as far as the maintenance man making the repair and getting into the database. for simple outages, the simple streetlight outages, we are currently looking at and internal metric of seven days to make those repairs. a street light goes out, whether and of off-on, or complete

burnout, we're looking at seven days to get it repaired. you heard earlier about the issues of identifying the streetlight and who it belongs to. we have to go through and verify we are not maintaining and other entities street light as well. we are committed to keeping the street lights on in the city of san francisco as well as the rest of the state where we on this street lights. we are looking at capital improvement projects here in san francisco of 23 streetlight circuits and updating more than 1100 street lights. this is where we will be making a $25 million investment over the next five years. this is to modernize the street light system. it's a cornerstone of this initiative, to replace the street lights served by what we call our regulated output loops.

it is basically upgrading the system to a standard streetlight system. customers should experience a few were burnouts, fewer problems with the new were upgraded system and they will experience improved lighting. >> in terms of the type of lighting, is that being coordinated so that the lights are hopefully going to be the same kind of lighting? >> we're hoping to go to an led system. we are looking to go to that, or at least a high-pressure sodium white. supervisor wiener: i would hope that the two agencies would coordinate on that so they are not different depending on what block you live on.

>> as well as light to light, that's a challenge as well. we will partner. for this year, 2012, we are looking at replacing 387 lights. this is about one-third of our series streetlights system. we are looking to begin work on this sometime in the third quarter. it is currently in the design stage. supervisor wiener: it's about 1000 that you have? >> 1100 in the next five years. we should have the streetlights converted. more detail on that -- we are looking at cementing a little over $7 million to upgrade the lights and the remaining will be over the next three to five years. as far as our longer-term strategy, we are looking at the general rate case and looking at

our ability to replace lights with led's. that is our longer-term strategy. we are presenting that in the 2014 rate case to the california public utilities. supervisor wiener: what was the number? >> i don't have the number and fronter -- in front of me. >> all of the street lights that are non historic will be replaced. supervisor wiener: thank you. >> with that, are there any questions? >supervisor wiener: in terms of the level of deferred maintenance, i have heard the #$40 million. i'm curious to know if that's accurate. >> i don't have that information.

>> that is something we could get back to you on. supervisor wiener: i'm sure it is a fair amount of deferred maintenance. >> i'm sure it's a significant number. supervisor wiener: what is the plan to address deferred maintenance? >> we have gone through a little bit of a change and hopefully for the better. we've changed our street light maintenance and the folks who go out and make the actual repairs to the streetlight, we have moved it from my organization to the first responders. we are actively going out, especially with the folks at night, looking for the folks that are out in the known areas where we have known ownership of the lights and we are making repairs then. we are looking for longer-term opportunities to treat a

streetlight outage much like we do any other average, so that's one of the things that will be coming hopefully in august. supervisor wiener: you talked about reducing the average number of days to respond or repair broken lights. is there a particular goal in terms of the average number of days? >> it's seven days for a simple repair. some of the other longer-term repairs will take longer due to the nature of the work. if it's one of these series street lights, those typically take longer. >> when do you anticipate having the average repairs down to seven days? >> we only have to tell our > 14. >> -- supervisor wiener: in terms of

the records, they are paper records. >> that's right. supervisor wiener: are you going to convert that to an electronic database? >> yes. we're bringing in some of the higher priority issues first but we are investing heavily in that system. >> -- supervisor wiener: with a year, will there be some more is at all or nothing? >> i'm not sure. i will have to get back to you. supervisor wiener: that seems like knowing who owns what, that is very helpful, so i hope that can happen even sooner. >> i think it would make us all the happier. supervisor wiener: members of

the public who wish to comment, if you could fill out the cards. supervisor olague: are any of these power through the solar energy? >> not at this time in our system. supervisor olague: i'm wondering if in terms of cost and efficiency of that something to look at. >> all of our lights are powered by our source and it's a 100% renewal power source. it is our same house, same call. -- it is our hetch hetchy power. supervisor wiener: in terms of moving toward the pedestrian great lighting, have you been

thinking about back as well? it takes a coordination to make sure we are all moving in one direction. can you talk a little bit about that? >> we may have some challenges their. our regulations are street power for the street and not necessarily a pedestrian. we should look at how we can help the community here. >> it is a standardized process for the territory. we're looking at standardize tariffs that leaned more toward road lighting. one thing we have done is to try to work with staff to identify lights that better fit san francisco. it will be difficult to adopt

that as our protocol because we have different cities with different protocols for lighting. >> what would be the impediment to having a different standard for the operation than elsewhere? >> it is a matter of efficiency. we're trying to identify the standards and something we strive to do but giving -- given the planning we have to keep in cost and operational flexibility, trying to meet city needs. we have tried to identify which flights are being used by the city and steep -- see if they fit with our needs. >> you do have approximately half the lights in the city and it's an unequivocal goal of the san francisco to have pedestrian

grade at lighting, so in terms of serving the needs of san francisco, i think it is critical that pg&e start moving toward pedestrian great lighting. what i would hate to see is having the puc acknowledge we should move in that direction and do it can to get there in the long run and then have pg&e keep doing the mistake of the past i think it's really important that the goal of pedestrian great lighting be embraced in san francisco. i could understand if we were a tiny town -- you can't have

every single town, but we're one of the largest cities in the san francisco. -- one of the markets with the largest lighting needs. i think it's important to embrace that. >> we are striving to meet the city's goals. i should clarify that all cities are required to be treated equal as part of the code. to the extent we are offering a customized service, we would have to offer it to another city. our goal is to identify alighting styles and changes we can make to meet the better streets plan, but i'm not sure a formal approach would come immediately. is something we can work on. >> -- supervisor wiener: are you

saying the code would prohibit pg&e from having infrastructure that fits san francisco's needs and it has to be one size fits all for the entire area? >> we are required to treat all cities equally. the offering of services to one see that's not offered to another might violate that code. >> -- supervisor wiener: i'm not asking for san francisco to get special treatment, but this is a place where on not a lot of people own cars and we have a lot of people walking on the sidewalk at all hours of day and night. it's different from suburban areas where i grew up where we did not have sidewalks. it's not about special treatment, it's about acknowledging the lighting needs of a particular location so that

if there is any work that has to be done, i'm sure we can work together to get permission. is that something you would work for the city on? >> absolutely. supervisor wiener: any questions? thank you very much. we will now open the floor to public comment. i have a free public comment cards. >> thank you for calling this hearing and i appreciate everyone for your presentation. i was frankly surprised to hear

that in the fourth quarter of last year, the estimate of closing repairs was 2.6 days and a statement that pg&e is down to just seven days to make a repair. i think we are aware there was a terrible crime committed on fair oaks street. i'm with the fair oaks community coalition. on november 28, iphone 311 and reported a street light out. they said they sent a crew to see you owned it and when i called the next day, i was told it was a pg&e poll and it would be repaired as soon as possible. 10 days later, the repair had still not been made and a vicious sexual assault was perpetrated by a man who grabbed a woman across 24th street under

bright streetlights and then dragged her across the intersection to the darkness under that burned out light to attack her. when i called the next day to report what had happened, i was told there was no report of such a claim of an outage. i gave the no. i was given and was told that was incorrect. i think attention must be paid to shortening the time for those repairs. supervisor wiener: next speaker. >> i'm a resident in the mission district and i have lived in san francisco three and a half

years. that entire time i have been working to get street lighting improved to replace colliding with something more adequate. that is a designated biking lane and for the safety of the commuters as well. the number of lights and intensity of lights are completely inadequate. the street lighting in that area, street lights are the primary source of elimination and it is completely inadequate. after about a year-and-a-half of effort, if i could put something on the screen here, the puc ordered pg&e -- the intensity of

the lighting basically needed to be doubled to improve safety and that order on september 1, nothing happened. nothing has happened. this is a high crime area. this is a safety issue and residents deserve a safe street lighting. i have communicated back and forth with ontario and i was told that when pg&e decided to upgrade the lighting, this street was not selected. i have to ask the question why and i have to ask the question who do we have to work with to have safe streets because this is completely inadequate. thank you.

>> i am with the fair oaks community coalition. adding to what was said that earlier about the attack that happened in december, just this last weekend, we had another situation where an individual was accosted under a poorly lit situation two doors from my front door. to the extent that there is any thing we as citizens of san francisco can do to push forward this pedestrian lighting program, that is what we want to put our efforts on. on our street, there is a conflict with trees and lights and pedestrian lighting is the way to deal with it. we like to express strong support for what you are doing and however we can help. supervisor wiener: thank you. and the other public comment? public comment is closed. i think you wanted to say

something? >> i wanted to try to clarify our little bit. to our knowledge, we don't know what the process difficulty was but we actually received information from you, the day following the incident and when i had that information, we immediately dispatched a person to prepare that light. we were not aware there was a light out. so i do want to try to clarify that. i work with residents quite often to identify suitable solutions. one of the issues was an issue of brightness and we determined that required an upgrade to the circuitry.

there was a request that went to mta and came back to us and our understanding was the cost would be borne by the city unless we were to repair it as part of the replacement plan. we identified the ones with the most frequent burnout and tried to find a metric that was unbiased. we want to identify areas with high crime and that is a priority as well but we do not have tremendous information about crimes happening in various districts. identifying the frequency of burnouts and operating that way -- supervisor wiener: i would like to thank everyone for coming out today.

even though there are disagreements and different perspectives on things, in the end, we have a grouping of agencies and we are all responsible as a group for providing adequate lighting to the city. i know that both puc and pg&e are working hard for the city and i want to make sure we are continuing in that direction and that we continue to improve response time continuously to reports of burnt out lights replacing some of the problem lights and that is a very short term and getting in the lights coded to improve the efficiency of repairs. but i 12 stress the importance of moving toward pedestrian grade at lighting.

i know it's a long process and not something that can happen overnight. but in the long run, it can happen and it is frustrating when you see lights being replaced with inappropriate non- pedestrian grade alights and that's why in my conversations, i stressed we need to be constantly focused as the system is being upgraded and replaced moving toward pedestrian grade lights, otherwise we will never get there. it has to be gradual and overtime, even if that means you have a mix of pedestrian grade and non-pedestrian grade. thank you for coming out today. this is the beginning of the conversation. can we continue this to the call of the chair? >> without objection, we will

continue this to the call of the chair. thank you, everybody and thank you for your patience. i know this item was scheduled for last week. are there any other items in front of the committee today? >> with that, the committee is adjourned.