PG&E Pleads Guilty to 84 counts of Manslaughter 7

[1503-44]

And bravely takes their slap on the wrist.


“What I told you was true ... from a certain point of view.” - Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Return of the Jedi"

 

[davidbeach]

I’m not aware of those deaths and therefore don’t know the details. But there’s no reason for any utility employee not going home after a day’s work. Certainly there are hazards, and hazards can be mitigated. There’s no reason the work has to be unduly dangerous.

Somebody on the outside may think we’re being slow and inefficient, tough. Injuries, or heaven forbid fatalities, means we weren’t being slow enough and deliberate enough. Nothing worth getting anybody hurt. Unfortunately, still a long time till we get to that day.

 

[3DDave]

It was a helicopter crash.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Victims-identified-in-fatal-PG-E-contractor-15315051.php

 

[waross]

Pay-wall.

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[1503-44]

I Didn't have to pay to see that.

I imagine, it didn't say, but the employees might have been inspecting the insulators on the very high voltage transmission lines, observation via helicopter. I don't think I would want that job myself. I suppose it can be made safe with the Faraday suits and all, but I don't need a job that bad. I don't like installing a new light fixture. Then there is always the possibility of heli blades contacting the cables. I don't imagine repairs are possible when working fom helicopters. So Have not drones taken over HV cable inspection duties? Why not?

"provided there are also criminal penalties for gov't inspectors and regulators for gross negligence."

Personally I don't see how Gov't inspectors and regulators paint into this picture very much. I don't know that much about the electrical industry, but in the petroleum industry the regulations are written for the lawmakers BY THE INDUSTRY. Any regulation that makes it to any gov hill that is too severe (costly) is almost immediately watered down by the industries' lobbiests to something that the utility can easily live with. Any regulation that is "burdensom" in its requirements is not permitted by the current administration, hardly even to be proposed. The typical regulations are mostly concerned with design and operations. In most of the fire cases it seems to be operations that are the problem. I note that inspectors can and do verify design to specs and dwgs reasonably well, but inspectors have relatively few if any responsibilities once the system goes operational, where regulations are far more concerned with reporting data after the facts, rather than ensuring safe operations through oversight. For example, pipelines are not required to submit intelligent pig inspection surveys to the pipeline safety division of DOT as they are finished. They are placed in the company's file system until the pipeline explodes. Only then will some DOT accident inestigator possibly want to see them. Neither do any gov inspectors review day to day operations, watch pressures, watch flow capacity. Nada. Nothing like that. There were no gov inspectors on the Macando platform. There were no gov inspectors on the bridge of Exxon Valdez. Neither is it a gov duty to put them there. Plus even more so, the companies don't want them there. Companies are basically entirely responsible for operations, they like it that way and they keep it that way as much as possible. Their high powered expensive lobbiests are very effective in their work doing so. The American Gas Association is way ahead of any regulation working its way through the legal process. They immediatly object to everything, saying the industry can police itself. We will do voluntary stuff and it will be fine and sufficient. No need to make this regulation. All that even before the words hit paper, and then they ultimately wind up writting the words that the lawmakers finally vote on. Just about every regulation I know of in the petroleum industry is a product of the industry itself. Reading the 737 Max thread I think the same, or more, is true of aviation. The presense of just about any regulation isn't a problem for these companies, except in the sense of overregulation being a problem, until someone needs a bad regulation, OR NO REGULATION, to share the blame. Then all regulations and the lawmakers are bad again.

I really don't see either regulation or government inspectors as any part of the problem. My view is that if it's your system, you should know how to operate it safely and you should design an operate it safely, without any need for government inspectors, or of putting any regulation on the books to tell you how to do so. Unfortunately it's not that perfect of a world. There are corrupt practices and greedy shareholders to consider.




“What I told you was true ... from a certain point of view.” - Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Return of the Jedi"

 

[IRstuff]

Helicopter inspections of utility towers are pretty common and used to have accidents fairly often. Some famous director's(?) son died in one in the mountains north of LA about 20 years ago.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[3DDave]

waross, if you are in Europe it may be that personal data laws compliance.

 

but in the petroleum industry the regulations are written for the lawmakers BY THE INDUSTRY

It's called 'agency capture', and it is one of the goals of industries who lobby governments relentlessly.
That is how Enron happened, just for one example.

Self-regulation is one of the fallacious fantasies flogged by Neoliberal free-marketeer ideologues. If there is an industry where it appears to be successful, that is only because the predictable disaster or fiasco just hasn't happened yet. Never has an economic theory claimed to be so science based yet so utterly and thoroughly disproven by facts on the ground.



"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."

 

[BUGGAR]

You talking about the wildfire or the gas explosion in San Bruno? Because of both of these, CPUC is making SDG&E replace their wood distribution poles with metal and replace the main gas pipeline into and through San Diego. Shareholders are taking a hit. If you have a 401K, you probably have some "Utilities" and will share.

 

[dauwerda]

No new roads generally need to be built to access ROWs. The ROWs were located where they are because they were accessible for construction in the first place. Really difficult to construct on a ROW that was never possible to access. If access is lost for some reason, it is generally permitted to be restored.

This is not true for lots of transmissions line that go through mountainous terrain. Hard to reach areas are often built by helicopter for the very reason they can't get typical construction equipment into the area. I don't know if this is applicable to the PG&E lines in question but it is certainly not true that all transmission lines have access via their ROW's.

I don't imagine repairs are possible when working from helicopters. So Have not drones taken over HV cable inspection duties? Why not?

Hot line work is absolutely done by working from helicopters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxDKVAYJ_t4

Drones have started to be used for inspection, however there is a lot of red tape to overcome for this as well , so it is a slow process.

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/08/18/xcel-energy-expanding-use-of-drones

 

[1503-44]

Winding spoilers on live cables isn't powerline tower construction. I have seen helicopters string cable from tower to tower, but I have not seen them actually set a tower in place. Plus most of the towers have concrete bases set well into the ground. I don't think a helicopter dropped those concrete piles in place. OK, maybe it would work if they dropped them from 10,000 ft. But seriously, I can imagine that a heli might have to set in a small tower somewhere or other from time to time, but I bet that certainly isn't very often. In fact on one of my pipelines we used helicopters to string 24"D pipe, but the machines were there first digging the ditch. It just wasn't a easy place to get a truck hauling a load of 40' long pipes into, but the trenchers didn't have any problem. I really haven't seen many areas where you absolutely can't get construction equipment to go, as long as it was wide enough to drive it in there, even a knife edge at 11,000 Ft elevation.

But OK, I shouldn't have said "always".

“What I told you was true ... from a certain point of view.” - Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Return of the Jedi"

 

[dauwerda]

I have seen helicopters string cable from tower to tower, but I have not seen them actually set a tower in place. Plus most of the towers have concrete bases set well into the ground. I don't think a helicopter dropped those concrete piles in place.

My comments weren't pertaining to what you have seen, they were pertaining to what actually happens - even if you haven't seen it. Do a quick google search and you will see all sorts of video's and images of helicopters flying in transmission towers.

Many of the steel lattice towers in these situations do not have concrete foundations, they have steel grillage foundations that are buried in the ground - which are dug by hand. Or, in more recent years, utilizing micro pile foundations: all accessed from helicopter only.

https://galvanizeit.org/project-gal...for-micropile-transmission-tower-foundations1

 

[Compositepro]

Helicopter installations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dlq47b2YpKY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dlq47b2YpKY

 

[1503-44]

OK. OK, Fine. If they can fly that stuff in, they can fly some smaller things out too, so I don't see "no access" as an excuse anymore.

“What I told you was true ... from a certain point of view.” - Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Return of the Jedi"

 

[IRstuff]

so I don't see "no access" as an excuse anymore.

If the installation was 20 or 30 years ago, then access might indeed be an issue, particularly if the underbrush and trees haven't been burned away and are overgrown.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[3DDave]

Access is always about several factors. Cost, Duration, Lives, with Duration and Lives driving Costs. I don't see these transmission lines as ever being 100% safe (a minimum of never any failure in the next 100 years) as long as there are people willing to put large communities into fire-season forests.

This is why PG&E should abandon its rough terrain transmission lines to save all three. If California wants to operate them and feels it's economical and safe to do so, they should take them over. Or California can license someone else. AFIAK the only people wanting to bid on PG&E assets want the San Francisco segment where there is lots of money and fewer trees.

I expect that California makes running power through fire season forest a requirement on PG&E to operate anywhere in California, much like the state was forcing that dam operator to maintain high water levels ahead of the heavy rains.

 

[waross]

Nothing new about setting towers with helicopters.
I haven't seen cables strung by choppers, but I have seen choppers string a pulling line that was used to pull in the conductor.
They did most of their work flying backwards.
The chopper had rearview mirrors on the skids.

My father and brother worked on the foundations of a 500 kV line through the BC coast mountains.
My brother was a grunt, digging holes and helping the carpenters build the forms.
The concrete and later the towers were flown in for the more challenging locations.
My brother remembered an afternoon pour when the weather was picking up.
As the chopper was tying to hover he got caught in some turbulence and had to jettison the concrete bucket.
Brother said that they watched to bucket roll down the mountain with their supper sandwiches taped to the bottom.
The chopper came back with another bucket to finish the pour, but no supper.
They used trails where they could but the trails were challenging.
Their old transit mix truck actually broke in half just behind the cab.

If the installation was 20 or 30 years ago, then access might indeed be an issue,

By the way, that job was in the mid 60s. My brother was 19 or 20.
Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[1503-44]

Repeat: If they can fly that stuff in, they can fly other stuff out.
Let's try not to get "stuck in the mud" with ROW access. It's an issue, but has a solution in most cases, even if it's via helicopter.

The larger picture might include fire risk and zoning policy, construction permits, property fire protection plan, structure fire proofing requirements according to location risk, ingress/egress-emergency access provisions, fire fighting capability and response .. Others?

“What I told you was true ... from a certain point of view.” - Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Return of the Jedi"

 

[ATSE]

Here's a question for the jury: how far away from a PG&E substation or power line is PG&E responsible for? 1/2 mile? 10 miles?
Is PG&E responsible for the spread of fires where federal, state, or counties own / oversee the land and forbid forest cutting, and allow unmanaged growth for 20+ years?
If the California fires spread to Nevada, would PG&E still be 100% responsible for 100% of the damage and loss of life?
Is it possible to differentiate initiation vs spread for liability?
To be clear, I have no affections for PG&E, governments, or any entity that does not have to compete for their income.
It does however seem like utilities are an easy target and scapegoat.

 

[1503-44]

Q1: Is the point located on PGE right of way (RoW)? If yes, then yes.
Q2: If PGE is responsibe for starting the fires, then yes, that plus all damages subsequent thereto. "Unmanaged growth" is allowing mother nature to do her work unhindered and at no cost to the landowners, or taxpayers. Forest fires are part of her management plan. Unfortunately in this case, nobody likes to mess with mother nature until the fires start. People are weird. They find ways and excuses to build houses anywhere, fire prone forests, beaches regularly swept by hurricanes, refineries, chemical plants, nuc power plants and volcanoes. The insurance companies need to make them pay their very much higher share than what we engineers pay for building all our houses in safe locations.
Q3: Is the Nevada property a PGE RoW? Neither forest fires, oil spills, or CV-19 respect state's, or national boundaries.
Q4: There is no difference between start and spread in terms of liability. If you didn't start it, it wouldn't have spread. If an arsonist starts a fire in the building next to your's and he runs out and fans the flames on your building .. yes, absolutely for sure, but even if the arsonist did not intend to burn up your house ... you're still going to want justice and that won't include allowing him to walk.

Yes. PGE is (was) a fat cow. My question is how did they get that way? By avoiding their duties could be one very big reason. It certainly will be one of the reasons in the long list of things that takes them down.

“What I told you was true ... from a certain point of view.” - Obi-Wan Kenobi, "Return of the Jedi"

 

[stevenal]

PGE = Portland General Electric.
PG&E = Pacific Gas and Electric.

I don't believe PGE is responsible for any fires in California.