PG&E Gets Hit by Regulators on Records Management
Three hundred employees work 24/ 7 to locate records.
April 17, 2011 at 08:00 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
A horrific natural gas pipeline explosion in San Bruno, California on Sept. 9, 2010, which killed eight and destroyed 38 homes, set Pacific Gas & Electric on a mad scramble to locate records. While discovery of records is often associated with litigation, PG&E's struggles demonstrate the far-reaching authority of many regulators to compel discovery, and in PG&E's case, threaten many millions of dollars in fines and force many millions more in additional testing.
As a result of the explosion of PG&E's pipeline, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has expressed concerns about the integrity of PG&E's entire 1,805 mile natural gas pipeline network, and on January 3 of this year, the CPUC ordered PG&E to produce records verifying that these gas lines were constructed and have been maintained in a safe manner.
The San Bruno pipeline, like many segments of PG&E's pipelines, was constructed in the 1950s, and the task of locating all records for all its pipelines has set the utility scrambling. PG&E has admitted that many of these records have not been stored in a centralized location, but rather at facilities across the state. Furthermore, the company is not exactly sure what it does and does not have. PG&E has said that it has more than 300 people working 24/7 sifting through old records, and so far the teams have scanned, reviewed and analyzed more than 1.2 million records. Local media have reported that PG&E has even gone as far as renting the San Francisco Cow Palace, site of the 1956 and 1964 Republican National Conventions, to sort through records. Clearly, the “not reasonably accessible” doctrine does not apply to regulatory inquiry.
Even with this herculean effort, on its March 15 deadline, PG&E admitted that it lacked records for a third of its pipelines–or more than 500 miles. The company said that it was still searching. State regulators then accused PG&E of “willful noncompliance” and have threatened the company with fines of $1 million per day, although later these were lowered to $3 million. California State Attorney General Kamela Harris has blasted the CPUC for being too lenient. Even if PG&E can avoid the larger fines, lack of records may still prove extremely costly. The CPUC is considering requiring the utility to conduct a “water pressure test” on all gas lines for which it cannot locate records, at a cost of $150,000 to $500,000 per mile. PG&E claims this additional testing is unnecessary, but unless it can find records relating to the pipeline, it may be forced to test more than 500 miles of lines.
Unfortunately, I do not believe that PG&E's record keeping practices are the exception. Many companies could find themselves in a similar predicament. Records do matter.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLawyers Drowning in Cases Are Embracing AI Fastest—and Say It's Yielding Better Outcomes for Clients
GC Conference Takeaways: Picking AI Vendors 'a Bit of a Crap Shoot,' Beware of Internal Investigation 'Scope Creep'
8 minute readWhy ACLU's New Legal Director Says It's a 'Good Time to Take the Reins'
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250