EDISON WON'T FACE CHARGES IN FIRE; CIVIL SUIT MAY FOLLOW DA'S DECISION ON '96 BLAZE.

Byline: Jesse Hiestand Daily News Staff Writer

Southern California Edison's failure to clear brush near a power pole likely caused the Calabasas-Malibu fire in 1996, but not enough evidence exists to bring criminal charges, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office announced Friday.

While utility officials greeted the finding as vindication, the firefighting agency that pressed for criminal charges said it may now pursue a civil lawsuit to recoup the $7.2 million cost of extinguishing the fire.

``We're disappointed the District Attorney has chosen to drop these charges because we believe the Calabasas fire was caused by the negligence of Southern California Edison,'' said California Department of Forestry spokeswoman Karen Terrill.

But after an 18-month investigation that involved some 60,000 documents, Deputy District Attorney Michael J. Cabral said he found insufficient evidence to secure a conviction of Edison.

``While Southern California Edison's activities in a very-high-fire-hazard area certainly increased the risks to the public, it is unlikely that we could convince the trier of fact beyond a reasonable doubt that it amounts to gross negligence,'' his report states.

Edison spokesman Tom Higgins said the utility was not negligent.

``As a matter of fact, we had an abatement program in place that was fully compliant with the law and was fully funded,'' he said.

The Oct. 21, 1996, blaze burned from Calabasas to the sea, scorching 13,650 acres; destroyed five homes; caused $12 million in property damage; and injured seven firefighters, including Glendale firefighter William Jensen, who was burned on more than 70 percent of his body.

Prosecutors were investigating whether the utility violated state laws requiring brush clearance around power lines. They had also considered charging the utility with unlawfully causing a fire, a possible felony.

An electrical engineer consulted by prosecutors concluded that contact with tree limbs caused the lightning arrester to fail and spew sparks, molten metal or both onto the ground beneath the pole.

Edison officials insist the fire was caused accidentally when Santa Ana winds blew eucalyptus branches onto a lightning arrester just east of Las Virgenes Road near the Ventura Freeway.

``When you get a windstorm of such intensity and ferocity that it bends trees over, I don't think you can ever guarantee completely that there isn't going to be some contact (of the limbs) with the line,'' Higgins said.

Cabral, in his report, found the utility knew these fast-growing trees posed a problem for nearby power lines, especially in a high-risk fire area subject to seasonal Santa Ana winds.

In Edison documents, he found evidence that some of these trees had last been trimmed 15 months before the fire, although the utility requires its contractors to cut back new growth at least once a year.

But the investigation ran into some setbacks that derailed criminal prosecution of Edison.

Cabral found it impossible to verify if the tree suspected of sparking the fire was one of those allowed to overgrow, and most of the trees in that area were trimmed immediately after the fire, hampering his ability to study the array of the branches.

Higgins said utility crews had to trim those trees to restore power after the fire and that overall the utility spends more than $20 million per year on weed and tree abatement.

Still, Edison has been hit by a civil suit from a resident who lost his home in the blaze, Higgins said. And now, the CDF may also file a civil suit.

``It's more than the money, because CDF doesn't get to keep the money anyway. It would go into the state general fund,'' Terrill said. ``We want to hold them accountable and deliver a message.''