Chairman's Award - Inside Edison - Edison International

Chairman’s Award 

Program Overview & 

Judging Guidelines 

1 | P age 

The company reserves the right to modify or terminate the program at any time. The program is administered by Corporate Communications. 

All decisions of Corporate Communications regarding interpretation and application of the program are final.

Our company has experienced many changes in the last year. Although many of the recent changes 

have been challenging, it is important for us to reflect on where we’ve been, where we’re going, 

and who helped us accomplish so much. 

It is you, our employees, who make this company successful. We want to feel proud—whether we’re 

talking to our families, friends or neighbors—that we’re part of a company that demonstrates people 

matter. That’s what the Chairman’s Award is about—celebrating employees who contribute to the 

success of our business while living the company’s values and guiding behaviors. 

Some people have suggested we postpone this year’s Awards program to save money. But I 

believe now, more than ever, is a time for us to celebrate our employees. I’m excited about the 

2013 Chairman’s Award and I appreciate all of the hard work that goes into making this program 

a success! 

Ted Craver 

Chairman & CEO 

Edison International 

2 | P age 



Table of Contents 

Program Overview 

Program Overview p. 5 

Who’s Eligible to Win p. 5 

What We Want to Recognize p. 5 

Changes to the 2013 Program p. 6 

Organizational Unit Support & Roles p. 7 

Nomination Process 

Nomination Process p. 10 

Sample Nomination Form 

Program Rules p. 12 

Nominee’s Job Function p. 13 

In Your Own Words p. 13 

Quality 1: Outstanding Performance p. 14 

Quality 2: Living the Values p. 15 

Values and Guiding Behaviors p. 16 

Finalist Judging Process 

Finalist Judging Process & Guidelines p. 18 

Number of Finalists per Org Unit p. 18 

Finalist Judging Process p. 18 

Finalists Recognition p. 19 

Finalist Nomination Ranking Form p. 20 

Winners Judging Process 

Winners Judging Process p. 22 

Winners Recognition p. 22 

Contact List 

Program Planning Team p. 24 

Executive Sponsorship Team p. 24 

Organizational Unit Leadership p. 25 

Program Directors p. 26 

Communications Liaisons p. 27 

3 | P age 




4 | P age 




The Chairman’s Award celebrates employees’ outstanding performance—people who “go above and 

beyond the call of duty” while living Edison International’s values and guiding behaviors. 

Who’s Eligible to Win 

The Chairman’s Award is open to current/active employees, supervisors and managers of the Edison 

International Companies, including those represented by the IBEW and UWUA unions, with some 

exceptions. The program excludes senior management (directors and above at SCE; managing directors and 

above at EME). Contingent workers (including supplemental personnel, consultants and contractors) are also 

ineligible, as are Ethics and Compliance and HR employees involved in the Chairman’s Award corporate 

vetting process. Also, previous Chairman’s Award winners are not eligible. All nominations must be for an 

individual employee (not a team). The employee’s highlighted performance must have been demonstrated 

within the last two years. 

What We Want to Recognize 

We want to recognize employees who are counted on and looked up to by their peers – those employees 

who motivate others to live our values. We’re looking for two main qualities in our winners: 

1. The first quality is outstanding performance—role models who go above and beyond what’s asked of 

them to deliver value to Edison International. When nominating someone, consider people who 

Take extra personal initiative to get the job done right. 

Are known as the “go to” people in their work group. 

Take performance to the next level. 

2. The second quality is living our values and guiding behaviors—role models who consistently 

demonstrate our values in action. When nominating someone, be sure to reinforce specific guiding 

behaviors and provide concrete examples. 

Continuous Improvement: Consistently raises the performance bar; develops others; ensures others 

have the context and information to succeed; pursues opportunities to grow and learn; takes 

appropriate risks; welcomes change and new ideas, not an “observer‐critic.” 

Excellence: Accepts accountability for his/her actions; acts with a sense of urgency; builds on the 

strengths of diversity; puts safety first for an injury‐free workplace; sets high expectations and gets 

results. 

Integrity: Acknowledges and learns from mistakes; delivers on commitments and promises; handles 

issues directly and openly; lives our values; walks the talk—actions and words are consistent. 

Respect: Assumes best intentions, not motives; fosters a positive, open environment; provides 

honest feedback and constructive coaching; recognizes the contributions of others. 

Teamwork: Encourages cross‐organizational collaboration; identifies new opportunities for creating 

value by working together; involves others and seeks their input; makes decisions for the greater 

good, not self‐interest; strengthens performance through mutual support. 

5 | P age 



Changes to the 2013 Program 

Our team gathered feedback from the 2011 program to identify ways to improve in 2013. We’ve made 

some significant program changes to better align with our new corporate structure. The most significant 

change is that we’ve incorporated a two‐step judging process across the organization. All Org Units will 

now choose a maximum number of finalists proportionate to their employee population base (see p. 

18). There will be 60 finalists total. Finalists will be vetted with Human Resources and Ethics prior to their 

submission to the Winners Judging Team for evaluation. The Winners Judging Team will consist of 13 Org 

Unit Chairman’s Award Program Directors plus a small group of former Chairman’s Award Winners – 

including at least one union member. The Team will evaluate the finalists and select 30 Chairman’s 

Award winners. 

FROM TO WHY 

40 Winners 30 Winners Allow for more personalized recognition – lower 

program costs. 

Org Units picked their own 

winners in a one‐step process. 

In most cases the judging 

panel included VPs and 

directors. 

Corp Center picked winners in 

a two‐step process using 

finalists. In most cases the 

judging panel included VPs 

and directors. 

Finalist recognition varied 

depending on Org Unit. 

Specific number of winners 

per Org Unit. (i.e. T&D = 5) 

Multiple nomination forms. 

Supervisors and Employee 

nominations. 

Multiple deadlines for 

nominations depending on 

Org Unit. 

Prizes – “family‐friendly” 

prizes and travel options 

worth $2,000 net. Prize 

administration fees $30,000. 

2‐step process for all Org Units. 

Step 1 – All Org Units will choose a 

maximum number of finalists proportionate 

to their employee population base – 60 

finalists total. Finalists will be vetted with HR 

and Ethics prior to submission to the 

Winners Judging Team. 

Step 2 – A Winners Judging Team consisting 

of 13 Org Unit Program Directors plus a 

small group of former Chairman’s Award 

winners, including at least one union 

member, select 30 winners from the 60 

finalists. 

Finalist Recognition Lunch with Craver. 

Number of winners per Org Unit suggested, 

but not fixed to allow flexibility depending 

on winner pool. 

One online nomination form for all 

nominations. Available for current/active 

employees to nominate. Reduced total word 

count requirement from 4,000 to 1,200. 

Single deadline for all nominations. 

Cash prize worth $2,000 net. 

Winner selection process is transparent and fair. 

60 finalists broaden recognition without adding 

cost. Enables flexibility – not locked to a specific 

number of winners per Org Unit. 

Broaden opportunity for corporate recognition. 

Breaks down barriers between Org Units. Allows 

latitude in Winner selection to recognize our 

best employees regardless of Org Unit. 

More “grass‐roots” nominations. Process 

simplified for Org Units. Corp Comm will provide 

greater support. 

Process simplified for Org Units. Corp Comm will 

provide greater support. 

Significantly lower cost of prize 

administration. 

6 | P age 



Organizational Unit Support 

Organizational Unit Leadership Role: 

As an officer, you plan an important role in the success of the Chairman’s Award program. Have fun with 

your program. This is a great opportunity to spotlight people who are making a difference in your 

organization. 

1. Please assign one Program Director and one Communications Liaison for your Org Unit to 

coordinate your efforts. 

2. Identify a Program Director to be responsible for managing the process within your Org Unit and 

ensure all program deadlines are met. We are requesting a Director‐level position because in 

many organizations Directors have served in this role in previous years and we want to have 

consistency across the organization. Also, Directors are not eligible to be nominated. In addition, 

the Chairman’s Award is a corporate priority and deserves executive attention. The Program 

Directors will oversee the nomination collection process and manage the judging to pick your 

finalists. They will also serve on the Winners Judging Team. 

3. Identify a Communications Liaison to help publicize the program, winners and deadline schedule 

within your Org Unit, and provide minimal nomination editorial support. 

4. Actively promote the award program to create excitement leading up to the winners’ recognition 

event tentatively scheduled for June 22, 2013. 

5. Celebrate the finalists and winners within your organization. Personally recognize your 

organization’s award recipients, highlighting their stories as examples of Edison International’s 

values in action. Personal recognition from senior leadership is a major component of this 

program’s prestige. 

6. Attend the Chairman’s Award recognition event. Your presence at the event will demonstrate your 

commitment to the program itself, but more importantly your commitment to the company’s 

values and culture. 

Chairman’s Award Program Director Role: 

1. Work with your Org Unit Leadership, Communications Liaison and other members of your team on 

promoting the overall program, encouraging nominations and managing the finalist judging 

process for your team. 

2. We’re using a “grass roots” nomination process across all business lines, where employees are 

encouraged to participate in the program to nominate their peers. This approach increases 

participation among employees. Employees may nominate their peers or a manager, managers 

may nominate their subordinates, and leadership may nominate their employees. However, teams 

may not be nominated. 

3. Please note that you may need to use additional personnel to review your nominations. Entries 

may require more editing, since specific details and anecdotes might not be included. Also, you 

may need to establish a process to ensure the claims made in the nomination are accurate. 

4. Form a selection committee of VPs and/or directors from the departments represented within the 

Org Unit to select the finalists for your group. 

5. You will also serve on the Winners Judging Team with a small group of former Chairman’s Award 

Winners – including at least one union member – to pick the 30 winners. 

7 | P age 



Chairman’s Award Communications Liaison Role: 

1. Work with your Program Director and Org Unit Leadership on the communication needs for your 

team. 

2. Plan to communicate the overall program and nominations schedule with your Org Unit 

employees – targeting three main deadlines – beginning, middle and end of the nomination 

window. 

3. Your Program Director may ask you to review your finalists’ entries, identify where those entries 

need to be expanded and provide writing support to enhance possible information gaps. 

Depending on the number of entries received, you may need additional help from your team. 

4. Publicize your finalists through localized communications and events. 

5. Once the finalists are announced, you will be asked to assist the Inside Edison and awards event 

team with writing/editing your winners’ information. 

General Tips: 

Plan ahead and allow enough time to complete the Org Unit finalists judging process. 

Consider diversity and representation across different job levels and categories (both represented 

and non‐represented, field and frontline) in your selection. Our goal is to have strong participation 

that represents the full breadth of our employee base. 

8 | P age 




9 | P age 




Current & Active Employees: 

1. You can nominate your peers using the online nomination form posted through 

http://inside.edison.com/chairmansaward. Contingent workers are not eligible to submit 

nominations. There will be one nomination form and one submission deadline for all Org Units. 

You may nominate your peers or a manager, and managers and leadership may nominate 

subordinates. You may also nominate someone outside of your Org Unit. 

2. You may not nominate yourself or a team of employees. However, you may submit multiple 

nominations – completing a separate nomination form for each employee. 

3. It is important to complete the entire nomination form because each section is specially designed 

to ensure consistency across all business lines. If the form is incomplete, it may not be eligible for 

consideration. To help streamline the nomination process, we’ve reduced the total word count 

requirement from 4,000 to 1,200. 

4. The judging process is not based on grammar, vocabulary or spelling, but rather on convincing, 

specific and factual examples that show why the employee deserves to be a role model for Edison 

International’s values. Short and succinct descriptions of an employee’s specific actions and 

behaviors are better than broad generalizations. 

5. The online form cannot be saved while you’re in the process of creating it. We recommend you 

draft your answers in a Word document first and then transfer them to the online form when you 

have time to complete it in one sitting. 

6. Once the form is submitted, you will receive an automatic email reply indicating the form has 

been received. A copy of the nomination will automatically be sent to your Org Unit’s Program 

Director and Communications Liaison for review and judging. They may follow up with you directly 

if they have a question about your submission. 

10 | P age 




11 | P age 




Program Rules 

1. Nominations must be submitted on the official online nomination form, which is located through 

http://inside.edison.com/chairmansaward. 

2. Current and active employees of the Edison International companies are eligible, including those 

represented by the IBEW and UWUA unions, with some exceptions. The program excludes senior 

management (directors and above at SCE; managing directors and above at EME). Contingent workers 

(including supplemental personnel, consultants and contractors) are also ineligible, as are Ethics and 

Compliance and HR employees involved in the Chairman’s Award corporate vetting process. Previous 

Chairman’s Award winners are not eligible. 

3. You may nominate your peers or a manager, and managers and leadership may nominate subordinates. 

You may also nominate someone outside of your Org Unit. 

4. You may not nominate yourself or a team of employees. However, you may submit multiple 

nominations – completing a separate nomination form for each employee. 

5. All sections of the entry form should be completed to be eligible for consideration. 

6. The employee’s highlighted performance must have been demonstrated within the last two years. 

7. There will be a total of 30 award winners celebrated in 2013. 

NOTE: Information will be taken directly from the entry form to include in the winners’ publicity materials. Please e‐mail Corporate 

Communications if the information included in the entry form is not intended to be shared in broad‐based employee 

communications such as Inside Edison and Portal. 

About the Nominator 

Your First Name: 

Mark 

Your Last Name: 

Murphy 

Your Job Title: ANALYST‐PROGRAM/PROJECT 3 

Your 10‐Digit Phone Number: 626‐302‐0000 

Your E‐mail Address: 

mark.murphy@sce.com 

About the Nominee 

First Name: 

John 

Last Name: 

Doe 

Job Title (as seen on Portal): MGR‐PROJECT/PRODUCT 1 

Dept./Working Group: 

Grid Ops 

Work Location: 

Ventura Regional Office 

Name of Immediate Manager/Supervisor: 

Jane Jones 

Nominee’s Organizational Unit: 

(drop‐down menu on online form) 

Transmission & Distribution 

12 | P age 




Nominee’s Job Function 

Describe the nominee’s job function and how this role supports the Organizational Unit or department. 

(preferably 50‐100 words) 

NOTE: In your answer, describe the nominee’s job responsibilities in a way that someone who doesn’t work in your area could 

easily understand. 

Sample Description: 

John Doe is a material handler at the Distribution Center. His job responsibilities include coordinating and 

tracking vendor and internal transportation trucks. Additionally, John Doe is the Distribution Center’s 

safety team captain. In this role, John provides direction and support to the location safety team, and 

identifies and champions safety improvements. John’s work is important to SCE because he ensures we 

have a safe, reliable fleet to serve customers, and he is directly involved in ensuring the safety of his 

team members. 

In Your Own Words 

As the nominator, please provide a short quote describing the nominee’s specific contributions and 

outstanding achievement. 


NOTE: This information may be used in program publicity materials for Inside Edison and the awards event. 

Sample Quote: 

“John Doe quickly became a “go‐to” person for the network of investigators across the enterprise. He 

consistently goes above and beyond in his role as an investigator. He is frequently assigned cases that 

are sensitive and require a balance of diplomacy and tact as well as firmness. He is often the first person 

the other investigators call because everyone knows he responds in a timely manner and with 

professional judgment.” 

13 | P age 




Quality 1: 

Serve as a Role Model for Outstanding Performance 

Why should this employee be singled out as a company‐wide model for performance 


NOTE: In your answer, you should describe how this employee goes above and beyond his/her normal job responsibilities, how 

this extra effort makes a difference within your area or the company, what impact this individual has had on the business and 

what the specific, measurable outcome has been. 

Sample Partial Example for Outstanding Performance: 

John Doe is eager to learn and grow, and he volunteers to manage tasks that exceed the responsibilities 

of his job description. When John learned that the manager of the Waste‐Not program – SCE’s employee 

recycling program – was planning a leave of absence, he asked to be trained to assume the acting 

manager role. 

In that capacity, John closed down one storage facility and worked with Corporate Resources to design 

and construct another. He revised the tracking system the company uses to estimate the amount of 

waste that is diverted from landfills. And, he made program information on Portal user‐friendly so that 

employees could learn how to dispose of all recyclable waste, not just Waste‐Not items. 

By diverting waste from landfills, the Waste‐Not program saved 2,421,271 BTUs in 2007, or the 

equivalent of eliminating annual emissions from 145,155 households, etc. 

14 | P age 




Quality 2: 

Serve as a Role Model for Living Edison International’s Values and Guiding Behaviors 

Review Edison International’s values and guiding behaviors listed on the next page. Please provide a 

general description of why this employee should be recognized as a model for living all of our values. 


NOTE: In your answer, be specific. Be sure to cite examples and use stories to show how these behaviors led to better 

performance. In other words, don’t just list guiding behaviors – show how the employee lived them. Also, connect the 

employee’s actions to their department’s or the company’s priorities. 

Sample Partial Example for Living the Values: 

John Doe consistently demonstrates that the company’s values are also his own. He is respected by his 

team for his attention to detail, honesty and unfaltering focus on high‐quality, tangible results. In the 

spirit of Continuous Improvement, John Doe was instrumental in the development of a new system to 

accelerate the claims process. The system minimizes the number of times a claims representative has to 

access the file. 

He always looks for ways to streamline our processes and to incorporate knowledge from lessons learned 

into new projects. He respects his peers and looks for ways to collaborate to improve project outcomes. 

He meticulously checks his work and is accountable when any questions come up. 

The processes and templates he developed for his own use were some of the building blocks of the One 

Touch Collection Process, a new program that consolidates this work. He trained his colleagues to apply 

the paperless system. Most recently, he trained his successor who is managing the new system that he 

pioneered. The new person has demonstrated success in her new role, no doubt in part to John’s careful 

transfer of knowledge, etc. 

15 | P age 



Edison International’s Values and Guiding Behaviors 

Integrity Excellence Respect 

Continuous 

Improvement 

Teamwork 

Acknowledges 

and learns from 

mistakes 

Accepts 

accountability 

for his/her 

actions 

Assumes best 

intentions, not 

motives 

Consistently 

raises the 

performance 

bar 

Encourages cross 

organizational 

collaboration 

Delivers on 

commitments 

and promises 

Acts with a 

sense of 

urgency 

Fosters a 

positive, open 

environment 

Develops others 

Identifies new 

opportunities for 

creating value by 

working together 

Handles issues 

directly and 

openly 

Lives our values 

Builds on the 

strengths of 

diversity 

Puts safety first 

for an injuryfree 

workplace 

Provides honest 

feedback and 

constructive 

coaching 

Recognizes the 

contributions of 

others 

Ensures others 

have the 

context and 

information to 

succeed 

Pursues 

opportunities to 

grow and learn 

Involves others 

and seeks their 

input 

Makes decisions 

for the greater 

good, not selfinterest 

Walks the talk – 

actions and 

words are 

consistent 

Sets high 

expectations 

and gets results 

Takes 

appropriate 

risks 

Welcomes 

change and new 

ideas, not an 

“observer‐critic” 

Strengthens 

Performance 

through mutual 

support 

16 | P age 



Finalist Judging Process 

17 | P age 



Finalists Judging Process & Guidelines 

All Org Units will choose a maximum number of finalists proportionate to their employee population 

base. There will be 60 finalists total. Finalists will be vetted with Human Resources and Ethics prior to 

their submission to the Winners Judging Team for evaluation. 

The Winners Judging Team will consist of 13 Org Unit Chairman’s Award Program Directors plus a small 

group of former Chairman’s Award Winners – including at least one union member. The Team will 

evaluate the finalists and select 30 Chairman’s Award winners. 

Number of Finalists per Organizational Unit 

Organizational Unit OU Leadership # of Finalists 

Edison International including Ethics Heller 2 

Edison Mission Energy Kennedy 7 

SCE Audits Heller 1 

SCE Customer Service Furukawa 8 

SCE External Relations Pickett 2 

SCE Finance Sullivan 7 

SCE Human Resources Miller 2 

SCE Information Technology Inlander 7 

SCE Legal Swartz 2 

SCE Power Supply Hemphill 3 

SCE Safety, Security & Compliance Martinez 3 

SCE SONGS Dietrich 6 

SCE Transmission & Distribution Mead 10 

Finalists Judging Process 

Based on best practices from previous years, we recommend Organizational Units use the follow 

process when picking their finalists: 

Program Directors should form a selection committee of VPs and/or directors from the departments 

represented within the Org Unit to select the finalists for their group. 

Members of the Finalist Judging Team should review the award criteria, judging guidelines and FAQs 

before reading any of their area’s nominations. Ensure that they have a clear understanding of the 

qualities that will distinguish the best entries. 

Depending on the number of entries received from the nomination process, they may want to set aside 

time on their calendar for the review process. 

While reviewing the nominations, consider highlighting or underlining specific examples or anecdotes that 

illustrate the award criteria: outstanding performance and living the values and guiding behaviors. 

18 | P age 



Prior to the first finalist judging meeting, each team member should: 

Step 1: Make a quick cut. Identify a select number of entries that stand out as excellent, company‐wide 

models. Look for entries that are compelling, demonstrate actions above employees’ regular job 

responsibilities, and provide specific stories you would want to retell to your employees. 

Generic 

Outstanding Performance 

“John is the ‘go‐to’ person for our group. People always count 

on him to take on tough assignments. He is looked up to by his 

peers. His actions make him a great role model for the team.” 

Living the Values 

“Susan embodies our value of continuous improvement by 

ensuring others have the information and context to 

succeed.” 

Stand‐Out 

“When one of our colleagues went on FMLA leave, John 

volunteered to take on her work load in addition to his own. He 

regularly met with her team to ensure project milestones were 

met and provided seamless service to our internal clients. As a 

result of his personal initiative, the project remained on time, on 

budget despite this unplanned event. His actions have inspired 

others to adopt a similar debrief process.” 

“Susan inherited a team where the former leader did not 

share information, which resulted in poor team 

performance and a lot of rework. As soon as Susan took 

the helm, she instituted weekly team meetings to share 

information. Through these meetings, the team identified 

a reporting error that, gone unnoticed, would have put the 

company at risk with SOX compliance.” 

Step 2: Narrow the field. Rank/prioritize your “stand out” entries. Look for specific, observable behaviors that 

support each criterion. Entries should provide anecdotes and examples other employees can learn from. To 

help organize the process, you may want to use the ranking table on the following page. 

Step 3: Finalize your choices. Choose your top finalists; take notes on why you feel these entries best 

exemplify the spirit and purpose of the award. Bring your ranking form and come prepared to discuss your top 

choices at the finalist judging committee meeting. 

Step 4: Attend the finalist judging meeting. Attendees should discuss their top choices. At that point 

the team will determine if any obvious finalists emerge and identify other contenders. Discuss the 

strengths and merits of the top entries to reach a decision on the finalists for your area. If clear finalists 

do not emerge through a unanimous decision, the team can determine award recipients through a 

majority vote. Consider diversity and representation across different job levels and categories (both 

represented and non‐represented, field and frontline) in your selection. Our goal is to have strong 

participation that represents the full breadth of our employee base. 

Step 5: Submit Finalists’ Names. Once the finalists are chosen, they should be ranked. The Program Director 

will submit the list of their ranked finalists to Corporate Communications, along with the finalists’ nomination 

forms. 

The 60 finalists will be vetted through Ethics and Human Resources before they’re submitted to the 

Winners Judging Team. 

Finalists Recognition 

The 60 finalists will be recognized at a Finalist Luncheon in the spring of 2013 Recognition and may also 

be mentioned in our company communication vehicles. 

19 | P age 



Finalists Nomination Ranking Form 

List the “stand out” nominees. Check the areas where there are clear examples to illustrate the 

criteria. Rank the nominees based on those entries that address both sets of qualities and the 

strength of the supporting anecdotes. 

Rank 

Nominee 

Performance 

Values 

Notes 

June Smith 

x 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

20 | P age 




21 | P age 




The Winners Judging Team will consist of 13 Org Unit Chairman’s Award Program Directors plus a small 

group of former Chairman’s Award Winners – including at least one union member. 

The Team will evaluate the 60 finalists submitted from each Org Unit. They will use the general judging 

procedures used to select the finalists. They will choose 30 Chairman’s Award winners who will be 

reviewed and confirmed by the Chairman’s Award Executive Sponsorship Team prior to their 

announcement. 

Winners Recognition 

Chairman’s Award winners will be announced in the spring of 2013. The program will culminate with the 

Chairman’s Award recognition event tentatively scheduled for June 22, 2013. All winners and their direct 

supervisor or manager and Edison International officers will be invited to the event. All invitees can 

bring one guest to the event. Winners will also receive a commemorative trophy, a cash prize worth 

$2,000 net, and recognition in our company communication vehicles. 

22 | P age 



Program Contact List 

23 | P age 



Chairman’s Award Program Planning Team 

Janet Clayton 

Senior Vice President 

Corporate Communications 


626‐302‐2257 

janet.clayton@edisonintl.com 

Gloria Quinn 

Director 



626‐302‐1933 

gloria.quinn@edisonintl.com 

Ed Hume 

Manager 



626‐302‐4837 

edward.hume@edisonintl.com 

Holly Fazio 

Project Manager 


Southern California Edison 

626‐302‐1765 

holly.fazio@sce.com 

Chairman’s Award Executive Sponsorship Team 

Ted Craver 

Chairman & CEO 


Janet Clayton 




David Heller 

Vice President 

Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer 


Jenene Wilson 


Human Resources 

Edison Mission Energy 

Erwin Furukawa 


Customer Service 


Veronica Gutierrez 


Local Public Affairs 


Todd Inlander 

Vice President & Chief Information Officer 

Information Technology 


Walt Johnston 


Power Delivery 


Pat Miller 




24 | P age 



Organizational Unit Leadership 


Erwin Furukawa 




Edison International/Audits/Ethics 

David Heller 


Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer 



John Kennedy 


Generation 


External Relations 

Steve Pickett 

Executive Vice President 



Finance 

Linda Sullivan 


Chief Financial Officer 



Pat Miller 





Todd Inlander 


Chief Information Officer 


Legal 

Russ Swartz 


General Counsel 


Power Supply 

Stu Hemphill 


Power Supply 


Safety, Security & Compliance 

Henry Martinez 




SONGS 

Pete Dietrich 


Chief Nuclear Officer 



David Mead 




25 | P age 



Chairman’s Award Program Directors 

Audits 

Janice Riblet – Program Director 

626‐302‐3722 

janice.riblet@sce.com 


Suzanne Middelburg – Program Director 

626‐812‐7518 

suzanne.middelburg@sce.com 

Edison International, Ethics 

Steve Powell – Program Director 

626‐302‐7834 

steve.powell@edisonintl.com 


Don Claybaugh – Program Director 

630‐771‐7813 

dclaybaugh@mwgen.com 


Les Stark – Program Director 

415‐929‐5512 

les.starck@sce.com 

Finance 

Tom Hampton – Program Director 

626‐302‐4942 

tom.hampton@sce.com 


Jeff Ward – Program Director 

626‐302‐5093 

jeffery.ward@sce.com 


Jack Huson – Program Director 

626‐543‐8196 

jack.huson@sce.com 

Legal 

Janet Combs – Program Director 

626‐302‐1524 

janet.combs@sce.com 

Power Supply 

Nicole Neeman Brady – Program Director 

626‐302‐3583 

nicole.neeman.brady@sce.com 


Don Neal – Program Director 

626‐462‐2587 

don.neal@sce.com 

SONGS 

Jim Madigan – Program Director 

949‐368‐9307 

james.madigan@sce.com 


Ed Antillon – Program Director 

909‐274‐1270 

ed.antillon@sce.com 

26 | P age 



Chairman’s Award Communications Liaisons 

Audits 

Barbara Wilson – Communications Liaison 

626‐302‐1831 

barbara.wilson@sce.com 


Kristen Small – Communications Liaison 

626‐633‐3332 

kristen.small@sce.com 

Edison International, Ethics 

Patty Cortez – Communications Liaison 

626‐302‐3418 

patty.cortez@edisonintl.com 


Susan Olavarria – Communication Liaison 

312‐583‐6125 

solavarria@mwgen.com 


Jessica Ritchey – Communications Liaison 

626‐302‐1659 

jessica.ritchey@sce.com 

Finance 

Mary Fitzpatrick – Communications Liaison 

626‐302‐7174 

mary.fitzpatrick@sce.com 


Sharon Valle – Communications Liaison 

626‐302‐7812 

sharon.d.valle@sce.com 


Nora Contreras – Communications Liaison 

626‐302‐5250 

nora.contreras@sce.com 

Legal 

Randy Bell – Communications Liaison 

626‐302‐6955 

randy.bell@sce.com 

Power Supply 

Chris Cabrera – Communications Liaison 

626‐302‐3725 

christopher.cabrera@sce.com 


Rene Lopez – Communications Liaison 

626‐462‐2504 

rene.lopez@sce.com 

SONGS 

Joann Loveless – Communications Liaison 

949‐638‐6106 

joann.loveless@sce.com 


Lorissa Grant – Communications Liaison 

909‐274‐1148 

lorissa.grant@sce.com 

27 | P age

Chairman's Award - Inside Edison - Edison International

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?