Edison Denies Cover-Up, Liability for Grand Fire

Southern California Edison Co. officials vehemently deny allegations made in a report by a Ventura County fire investigator that not only was the company responsible for last year’s 11,000-acre Grand fire, but that Edison employees attempted to conceal evidence that the company’s power lines had started the blaze.

“We very strongly deny both that we started the fire and that we tried to conceal evidence during the investigation into the fire,” company spokesman Steven Hansen said Friday. “We cannot comment further on that because of pending litigation.”

Although the county fire investigator’s report says that all evidence points to Edison-owned power lines being the source of the blaze, investigators speculated a few days after the fire that it may have been sparked by pumping equipment on the Cochran Oil Lease off Goodenough Road just north of Fillmore.

Since the fire, seven ranchers and property owners have filed lawsuits against Edison seeking more than $2.5 million for damages from the April 28, 1996, blaze that burned from Fillmore to the edge of the Santa Paula city limits.

Attorney DeWitt “Red” Blase, who represents five of the landowners--Robert J. Soares, the John H. Weber trust, Rancho Simpatica, B.S. Farms and Ross and Susan Wileman--did not want to comment on the lawsuit.

The seven cases, which were recently consolidated by a Ventura County Superior Court judge, are scheduled to go to trial in September.

The lawsuits allege that Edison was negligent in constructing and maintaining its facilities, and as a result property owners in the burned area lost fruit, trees, irrigation systems and buildings to the fire.

Adding support to the lawsuit was the report by Ventura County fire investigator Keith Mashburn which was completed late last month, concerning the origins of the blaze.

Mashburn’s report states that poorly maintained power lines owned by Edison arced and ignited the fire.

“It is my opinion that the cause of the Grand Fire was the failure of Southern California Edison to properly maintain and service their electrical distribution equipment,” Mashburn writes in the report.

Mashburn further states that after the fire, investigators and other employees with Edison refused to cooperate with his investigation, tried to “erase evidence by trampling on and destroying arc marks” at the scene, and that Edison fire investigators would not share their findings.

Mashburn also said that he looked into the possibility that equipment owned by the Cochran Oil Lease may have been responsible for the fire and found “no evidence of electrical failure in the equipment.”

Reached at the Ventura County Fire Department headquarters Friday afternoon, Mashburn said he could not comment on the investigation or whether there was an ongoing criminal investigation.

“I can’t talk about it, I’m sorry,” Mashburn said. “It’s pretty big news though.”

In addition to the claims by ranchers and other landowners, the Fire Department and the California Department of Forestry are seeking reimbursement for the costs of fighting the fire, said Deputy County Counsel Noel Klebaum.

The county is seeking to recover $311,000 in expenses for fighting the fire, Klebaum said. The California Department of Forestry’s costs were more than $1 million, officials said. At its peak, more than 2,000 firefighters battled the blaze.

“A suit has not been filed yet, but Edison has also not come forward to say, ‘We want to pay you and are ready to cooperate,’ ” Klebaum said.

According to court records related to the pending lawsuit, the state attorney general’s office is expected to file a complaint against Edison on behalf of the forestry department in the next month.