You can't say that for sure until you've read the document that allows PG and E to utilize the land. Each and every agreement is different.
I'm kind of assuming that their own lawyers in assessing their probable liability for the 2017 and 2018 fires that led to the bankruptcy filing, and the federal judge who assessed that their failures to do what is legally required were, on top of any civil violations, a violation of their criminal probation, and so on, have done their homework on what the legal requirements are.
If you've got some reason to think they're all wrong, though, I'd be interested to hear it, but as far as I can tell there's not really even a serious question on the legal responsibility issue.