PG&E denies it put 'junked' gas pipe in the ground
Jaxon Van Derbeken, Chronicle Staff Writer
San Francisco Chronicle October 20, 2011 06:45 PM
Copyright San Francisco Chronicle. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. ![]()
SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. bristled Thursday at state regulators' suggestion that the company installed "junked" pipe in its gas-transmission system in the 1940s and '50s, saying its use of properly reconditioned pipe at the time was perfectly safe and challenging officials to prove otherwise.
At issue was a legal filing made Wednesday by a lawyer with the safety arm of the California Public Utilities Commission, saying regulators had found PG&E documents suggesting the company used "salvaged or junked" pipe decades ago on gas lines that are still in service.
The filing by commission attorney Robert Cagen noted that such flawed pipe would raise "serious safety concerns" in light of last year's explosion of a PG&E transmission line in San Bruno that killed eight people. Short pieces of pipe installed at the blast site turned out to be substandard and possibly salvaged, and the state has asked PG&E to produce any records it might have on recycled pipe.
In PG&E's response, attorneys Lisa Jordan and Joseph Malkin said the utility had asked the state commission to specify which documents raised such an immediate concern. Rather than do that, regulators filed a motion seeking to make the documents public, PG&E said in arguing that an administrative law judge deny the motion at a hearing Nov. 1.
PG&E said that if there are indications of danger lurking in some 2 million company documents at issue, knowing where those safety issues can be found would "enable us to take appropriate action."
"If it believes it has evidence of an imminent safety threat," the state commission "has an overriding responsibility to bring that to the attention of the operator so the safety issue can be immediately addressed," PG&E said.
The company said Cagen and the agency's legal division "declined to identify any specific document it claims raises a significant safety issue."
PG&E also said that reusing salvaged pipe was common in the pipeline industry in past decades, and that the company is dealing with any risks posed by it through its testing program and other efforts.
"The reuse of salvaged (not 'junked,' as legal division's motion suggests) pipe was a common practice throughout the industry at least through the 1950s," PG&E's attorneys wrote. "Reused pipe would be cleaned, inspected, and, if in satisfactory condition, recoated prior to use."
The motion also denied the state commission's statement that PG&E was asserting "blanket confidentiality" on its documents. It said all the agency has to do is cite the document at issue to PG&E, which would then remove employee names or other sensitive information before clearing it to be disclosed.
At issue was a legal filing made Wednesday by a lawyer with the safety arm of the California Public Utilities Commission, saying regulators had found PG&E documents suggesting the company used "salvaged or junked" pipe decades ago on gas lines that are still in service.
The filing by commission attorney Robert Cagen noted that such flawed pipe would raise "serious safety concerns" in light of last year's explosion of a PG&E transmission line in San Bruno that killed eight people. Short pieces of pipe installed at the blast site turned out to be substandard and possibly salvaged, and the state has asked PG&E to produce any records it might have on recycled pipe.
In PG&E's response, attorneys Lisa Jordan and Joseph Malkin said the utility had asked the state commission to specify which documents raised such an immediate concern. Rather than do that, regulators filed a motion seeking to make the documents public, PG&E said in arguing that an administrative law judge deny the motion at a hearing Nov. 1.
PG&E said that if there are indications of danger lurking in some 2 million company documents at issue, knowing where those safety issues can be found would "enable us to take appropriate action."
"If it believes it has evidence of an imminent safety threat," the state commission "has an overriding responsibility to bring that to the attention of the operator so the safety issue can be immediately addressed," PG&E said.
The company said Cagen and the agency's legal division "declined to identify any specific document it claims raises a significant safety issue."
PG&E also said that reusing salvaged pipe was common in the pipeline industry in past decades, and that the company is dealing with any risks posed by it through its testing program and other efforts.
"The reuse of salvaged (not 'junked,' as legal division's motion suggests) pipe was a common practice throughout the industry at least through the 1950s," PG&E's attorneys wrote. "Reused pipe would be cleaned, inspected, and, if in satisfactory condition, recoated prior to use."
The motion also denied the state commission's statement that PG&E was asserting "blanket confidentiality" on its documents. It said all the agency has to do is cite the document at issue to PG&E, which would then remove employee names or other sensitive information before clearing it to be disclosed.
No comments:
Post a Comment