VII. PG&E REPORTS REQUIRED
The NTSB reports provide us with reason to investigate whether violations of law have occurred, and if so whether the violations may have been factors in causing the San Bruno rupture or contributing to it. We provide Respondent PG&E with its first opportunity to contest any facts in NTSB's three reports appended to this investigation. We will expect that if PG&E disagrees with NTSB facts stated and found in the report, that PG&E will present a summary of the evidence sufficient to deny the existence of each fact stated in the NTSB reports. The reports are attached hereto as Appendices A, B, and C. The Commission also directs PG&E to provide its contentions, with detailed facts supporting them, whether with different information PG&E would have changed anything from the pipe's actual history of maintenance, inspection, operation, and replacement of the San Bruno pipe. PG&E should assume that the different information in this alternate history would assume that PG&E records in NTSB's possession had accurately shown both that the San Bruno pipe was seamed, and that San Bruno as-built drawings, specifications, pipe manufacturer's operating limits and instructions, and all other pipe records from 1955-2010 were complete and quickly retrievable.
PG&E is therefore directed to appear and provide a report by
April 18, 2011, to identify all reasons of law and fact currently known to PG&E to establish that the company has committed no violation of law with respect to its recordkeeping of data needed and appropriate for safety engineering. If PG&E also takes the position that the September 9, 2010 San Bruno transmission pipeline rupture would have occurred even if PG&E had after 1955 kept and maintained complete, accurate, and easily accessible records of all aspects of the San Bruno transmission pipe's existence and service, we further direct PG&E to explain that position.
The Commission therefore directs PG&E to file, by April 18, 2011, a written report with the Commission, served on all parties to this proceeding, which fully responds to the following directive for information:
1. List each factual contention stated, and conclusion reached, by the NTSB reports (Appendix A, B, C) that PG&E contends is incorrect, and provide support for PG&E's position.
2. Provide PG&E's explanation as to its policy and practices since 1955 through August 2010, for:
A. Maintaining the technical instructions, manuals, and technical maps and drawings, manufacturer and designer specifications and operating and maintenance instructions, as-built documents, and all other original technical documents, pertaining to transmission pipelines operated by PG&E. Identify PG&E's polices and practices for the period of time that such data and documents were to be maintained. If PG&E's policies and practices changed during that period, identify the change, the date of the change, and summarize the reason for the change. Provide all written PG&E manuals or written documents in use during this period which state such policies and practices.
B. Maintaining records of operations, including but not limited to gas pressure. Identify PG&E's polices and practices for the period of time that such data and documents were to be maintained. If PG&E's policies and practices changed during that period, identify the change, the date of the change, and summarize the reason for the change. Provide all written PG&E manuals or written documents in use during this period which state such policies and practices.
C. Maintaining records of leaks, electronic problems, and other transmission pipeline anomalies noted by PG&E. Identify PG&E's polices and practices for the period of time that such data and documents were to be maintained. If PG&E's policies and practices changed during that period, identify the change, the date of the change, and summarize the reason for the change. Provide all written PG&E manuals or written documents in use during this period which state such policies and practices.
D. Maintaining records of all inspections, tests, and safety risk analyses done on transmission pipes. Identify PG&E's polices and practices for the period of time that such data and documents were to be maintained. If PG&E's policies and practices changed during that period, identify the change, the date of the change, and summarize the reason for the change. Provide all written PG&E manuals or written documents in use during this period which state such policies and practices.
E. Maintaining the records referred to in A-D above in ways that can be identified, accessed, and retrieved efficiently and promptly. If PG&E's policies and practices changed during that period, identify the change, the date of the change, and summarize the reason for the change. Provide all written PG&E manuals or written documents in use during this period which state such policies and practices pertaining to accessibility, usability, and retrievability.
3. Provide a summary of actions PG&E took between
1955 and September 8, 2010 to promote safety with respect to its natural gas transmission pipelines in general and San Bruno's line 132 in particular.A. PG&E action taken or procedures developed
B. The date of such action or procedure
C. Explain how PG&E's actions were designed to promote safety with respect to those transmission lines.
D. Provide all written safety risk assessments that PG&E conducted between 1955 and August 2010 on the pipeline that ruptured on September 9, 2010 and on any other portion of transmission line 132. By "safety risk assessment" the Commission means a PG&E analysis of whether to replace the pipe to promote safety, or whether to conduct additional tests or analyses to confirm the safety integrity of the pipe, or to take other action to promote safety.
E. Provide all written safety risk assessments that PG&E conducted between 1955 and August 2010 on any and all transmission pipes in its system during that time. By "safety risk assessment" the Commission means a PG&E analysis of whether to replace the pipe to promote safety, or whether to conduct additional tests or analyses to confirm the safety integrity of the pipe, or to take other action to promote safety.
4. Between 1990 and 2010, in conducting safety risk assessments on its transmission lines, for purposes of deciding whether to replace portions of the line, list and identify, and describe, the types of historical documents and other information that PG&E used to make its assessments.(e.g. as built documents, operational pressures).
5. Does PG&E contend that the September 9, 2010 San Bruno pipeline rupture was unpreventable by the exercise of prudent utility safety care? If the answer is anything other than an unqualified "no", provide support for PG&E's contention.
6. Identify the documents or data that PG&E provided to the NTSB to identify the pipe at San Bruno as "seamless". State:
A. The date of the transmission of the documents or data to NTSB.
B. The date on which PG&E first informed the NTSB of its mistake regarding the seamless pipe at San Bruno, or the date on which NTSB informed PG&E of its mistake.
C. Explain why the data (seamless pipe) was incorrect, and when and how this occurred.
7. After 1955 and before September 2010, did PG&E keep and maintain records of gas pipe weld failures or defects found before or after use? If yes, identify the date and circumstances of the failures or defects, and provide all documents and data that pertain to such failures or defects.
8. Provide the names (and titles if employee or agent) of all witnesses to the responses and information in the report. Provide the name of each such witness with respect to specified portions of the report.
9. The Commission also directs PG&E to provide the following additional information in a separate filing with the docket office no later than March 11, 2011. Does PG&E agree to reimburse the Commission for costs incurred in investigating the causes of the San Bruno rupture and for costs of any other Commission investigation that stems from it? If PG&E answers anything other than an unqualified "yes", PG&E is directed to state facts and law in support of its position.
Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. An investigation is instituted on the Commission's own motion to determine whether Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) violated any provision of the California Public Utilities Code, general orders, federal law adopted by California, other rules, or requirements, by its recordkeeping policies and practices with respect to its transmission gas service.
2. PG&E is named as Respondent to this investigation.
3. Respondent PG&E is directed to show at hearings why the Commission should not find it in violation of provisions of the Public Utilities Code (Pub. Util. Code), general orders, decisions, other rules, or requirements identified in this Order, and/or engaging in unreasonable and/or imprudent practices related to these matters, and why the Commission should not impose penalties. If any violation by PG&E is found, PG&E is directed to show why penalties and/or any other form of relief should not be applied. PG&E is also directed to file reports as required in this order no later than March 11, 2011 and April 18, 2011, and providing the information required and specified in this order.
4. PG&E is hereby given notice that fines may be imposed in this matter pursuant to Public Utilities Code §§ 2107 and 2108.
5. PG&E is hereby given notice that the Commission may order PG&E to implement measures designed to prevent future gas hazards to safety pursuant to Public Utilities Code § 761.
6. Pursuant to Rule 7.1(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, this proceeding is categorized as adjudicatory, deemed to require hearings, and this Order includes a preliminary scoping memo. This Order, only as to category, is appealable under Rule 7.6.
7. A prehearing conference shall be convened before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for the purpose of establishing a schedule in this matter, including the date, time, and location of an evidentiary hearing, and for good cause shown the ALJ and/or Assigned Commissioner may extend the report deadlines specified herein, for any particular responses required.
8. The Executive Director shall cause a copy of this Order to be served electronically and by certified mail on the Respondent, PG&E, at:
Christopher P. Johns, President Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94105 |
Lise H. Jordan, Law Department Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94105 |
Brian K Cherry Vice President, Regulatory Relations Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1087 San Francisco, CA 94105 |
This order is effective today.
Dated February 24, 2011, at San Francisco, California.
MICHAEL R. PEEVEY
President
TIMOTHY ALAN SIMON
MICHEL PETER FLORIO
Commissioners
Commissioner Catherine J.K. Sandoval, being
necessarily absent, did not participate.
