PaintSquare.com
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on LinkedIn Like us on Facebook Follow us on Instagram Visit the TPC Store
Search the site

 

Advertisement

Clemco Industries Corp.


Coatings Industry News

Main News Page


Pipeline Errors Could Cost PG&E $6.75M

Tuesday, November 5, 2013

More items for Health & Safety

Comment | More

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. is facing a proposed $6.75 million fine after a California judge ruled that the embattled utility delayed and attempted to mislead regulators when it revealed record-keeping errors for two of its pipelines.

The natural gas pipelines—Line 147, running under San Carlos, CA, and Line 101, extending from San Francisco to Milpitas—were found to be operating at pressures based on incorrect PG&E records about pipeline seams and decades-old pressure tests.

Although PG&E inspectors reportedly discovered the errors in October 2012, it did not publicly file a correction until July, and then "created a false impression of insignificance" by filing the errors as an "errata," Maribeth Bushey, the California Public Utilities Commission administrative law judge, wrote in the proposed decision, filed Wednesday (Oct. 30).

'Disheartening' Rule Violations

The management and legal decision-making regarding the treatment of discovered errors is "profoundly disheartening in that it reflects a lack of candor and appreciation of public interest," Bushey said in the proposed decision.

PG&E pipelines
City of San Carlos

A California Public Utilities Commission judge wants PG&E to pay a $6.75 million fine for not promptly correcting pipeline record errors and allegedly attempting to mislead regulators about the significance of the errors.

Bushey called PG&E's record-keeping flaws "distressingly similar" to the problems that contributed to the utility's fatal 2010 pipeline explosion in San Bruno, CA, adding that PG&E's system safety has been one of the CPUC's highest priorities for the last three years.

The decision alleges that PG&E violated the ethics rule (Rule 1.1) of the CPUC's Rules of Practice and Procedure by not promptly correcting and properly notifying regulators about incorrect records and for "mischaracterizing the correction when filed as a routine and non-substantive correction."

PG&E's poor record-keeping and inadequate inspections came under fire after investigators traced the San Bruno blast to the use of a substandard, poorly welded pipe section that could have been discovered by appropriate records and testing.

A PG&E spokesperson said the utility is reviewing the proposed decision.

Emails Raise Concerns

In July, lawyers representing PG&E presented a document to file with the CPUC that stated that the information PG&E filed in October and November 2011 to justify its request to lift operating pressure restrictions on Lines 147 and 101 contained errors. 

The commission's docket office rejected the the July document, calling it "untimely to the extent that it sought to make a substantive change to issues in a previously filed document which the Commission had resolved by decision."

The document, titled, "Errata to Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Supporting Documentation for Lifting Operating Pressure Restrictions on Line 101 and 147," said that in 2011, PG&E records showed that Line 147 was seamless, or contained double submerged arc welds, but the July document revealed that the pipeline actually had single submerged arc welds, which affected the maximum allowable operating pressure. 

Line 147 was taken out of commission for most of October after San Carolos city officials learned of internal emails written by PG&E engineers in November 2012 that raised concerns about the pipeline thinning and showing signs of corrosion.

In one email, an engineer wrote, "Are we sitting on another San Bruno situation?" the San Francisco Appeal reported.

The July document also stated that the maximum allowable operating pressure for Line 101 relied on a 1989 pressure test, which PG&E said it should not have relied on.

Records are 'Extraordinarily Controversial'

In August, the CPUC's chief administrative law judge and assigned administrative law judge issued their "Ruling Directing Pacific Gas and Electric Company to Show Cause Why It Should Not be Sanctioned for Violation of Rule 1.1 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure."

San Bruno pipeline explosion
San Bruno Fire Department

PG&E's record-keeping flaws are "distressingly similar" to the problems that contributed to the utility's fatal 2010 pipeline explosion in San Bruno, CA, an administrative judge wrote in the proposed decision.

In their ruling, the judges said that PG&E's July document "raises procedural and substantive issues" because parties are not allowed to file pleadings to correct minor typographical or computational errors in previously filed applications.

By titling its document an "errata," PG&E appeared to be revealing a substantial error in a "routine-appearing document," which could be seen as an attempt to mislead the commission, the judges wrote.

"Attempting to correct and application eighteen months after the Commission issued a decision appears to be an unreasonable procedural choice and could be interpreted as attempting to create an inaccurate impression of a routine correction," the judges wrote. "The timing of the attempted filing, the day before a summer holiday weekend, also raises questions."

The judges said the accuracy of PG&E's pipeline records "has been and remains an extraordinarily controversial issue in which the public has an intense interest."

PG&E was ordered to appear at a Sept. 6 hearing to show cause for why it should not be sanctioned for violating the rules. At the hearing, PG&E contended that it had submitted an errata as "a good faith attempt to provide formal notice of the error" and its July filing was "not a purposeful, reckless or grossly negligent attempt to mislead."

Breakdown of Proposed Fines

According to the proposed decision, PG&E became obligated to inform the commission of its errors on March 20, 2013, and proposed that the utility be fined $50,000 for each day that it delayed filing its errors—105 days, for a fine of $5.25 million.

Additionally, Bushey wrote that a $50,000 per day fine should be levied for each day that the "misleadingly titled document" remained pending at the commission when PG&E could have retrieved and corrected it—another 30 days and $1.5 million in fines.

The proposed fine will go before the entire commission at either its Dec. 5 business meeting or a later date, at which point it may adopt all or part of the decision, amend or modify it, or prepare its own decision. The decision does not becoming binding until the commission acts.

   

Tagged categories: Corrosion; Explosions; Health and safety; Laws and litigation; Pipelines

Comment Join the Conversation:

Sign in to our community to add your comments.

Advertisements
 
Bullard
 
Upgrade with the Bullard GenVX
 
Click here for your blast helmet.
 

 
SABRE Autonomous Solutions
 
Productivity
 
Personnel are free to do other tasks while the ALPHA1 does the “dirty work”.
 

 
Industrial Vacuum Equipment Corp.
 
Hurricane Vacuums
& Dust Collectors
 
Vacuum and dust collector hose, filters and related accessories.
IndustrialVacuum.com
 

 
SAFE Systems, Inc.
 
SAFE Systems'
Blast Lights &
Deadman Switches
 
Halogen or LED blast lights available with our NEW urethane bumper. Switches available in many colors for color coding your hoses.
 

 
KTA-Tator, Inc. - Corporate Office
 
New KTA Pipeline Inspection Kit
 
• Defelsko standard memory body
• Positector FTS 0-250 mils, cabled dry film thickness probe
• NEW Positector Shore D hardness probe
• All essential inspection equipment!
Visit www.ktagage.com
 

 
Blastox/The TDJ Group, Inc.
 
Blastox® - One Step Lead Abatement
 
Sandblast additive delivered to jobsite pre-blended to eliminate hazardous abrasive wastes. Why mix, meter or apply at the job-site? Blast with ease and
Let your painters paint!
1(800)-252-7869
 

 
ARC / A.W. Chesterton Company
 
Superior Impact & Wear Resistant Lining
 
100% solids, impact resistant, ceramic reinforced, epoxy/urethane hybrid lining for severe abrasive wear and impact resistance.
 

 
Modern Safety Techniques
 
Modern Safety Techniques
 
With our unique LTCat, we can help to provide clean, safe breathing air to your workers. Take a look at our Breathing Air Systems, we supply at least twice as much charcoal as our competitors! Modern
 

 
Vector Technologies Ltd.
 
The Original Performance Proven Vacuum Solutions
 
VecLoader® 616 Double Dump, Continuous Vacuum, 170 HP w/ 2,400 CFM & 28” Hg. 33% More Efficient than traditional vacuum systems! Choose Vector for the most powerful and the most reliable trailer mounted vacuums in the industry! Email us at: inquiry@vector-vacuums.com or call us at: 800-832-4010
 

 
CHLOR*RID International Inc.
 
SOLUTIONS THAT WORK
 
Companies that invest in corrosion control use CHLOR RID products
  • Soluble salt removal liquid
  • Test kits to verify contamination levels
  • Surface passivation to hold the blast
INFO@CHLOR-RID.COM 800.422.3217
 

 
 
 

Technology Publishing Co., 1501 Reedsdale Street, Suite 2008, Pittsburgh, PA 15233

TEL 1-412-431-8300  • FAX  1-412-431-5428  •  EMAIL webmaster@paintsquare.com


The Technology Publishing Network

Durability + Design PaintSquare the Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings Paint BidTracker

 
EXPLORE:      JPCL   |   PaintSquare News   |   Interact   |   Buying Guides   |   Webinars   |   Resources   |   Classifieds
REGISTER AND SUBSCRIBE:      Free PaintSquare Registration   |   Subscribe to JPCL   |   Subscribe to PaintSquare News
MORE:      About PaintSquare.com   |   Privacy policy   |   Terms & conditions   |   Site Map   |   Search   |   Contact Us