Regulators should reject BGE’s effort to limit inquiry into gas safety inspector program, OPC states in filing
BALTIMORE – Evidence gathered so far raises significant concerns regarding Baltimore Gas and Electric’s gas system safety inspection program, demanding a full investigation into the safety inspection processes for all the utility’s gas capital construction programs, the Office of People’s Counsel argued in a motion to the Public Service Commission this week. OPC’s motion responds to BGE’s contention that the Commission-ordered investigation is limited in scope to only the programs and timeframe related to the work performed by the discredited BGE employee that triggered the investigation.
“The Commission order that initiated the investigation last year envisioned inquiry into both whether BGE has adequate gas system safety inspection protocols and practices and the extent of BGE’s compliance with those protocols and practices, across BGE’s entire gas system,” said Maryland People’s Counsel David S. Lapp. “We are asking the Commission judge to clarify that the investigation encompasses all BGE gas infrastructure inspection protocols, practices, and procedures, regardless of the BGE program in which they are used and going back at least 10 years.”
OPC’s request relates to a Commission order establishing an investigation in Case No. 9791 into alleged deficiencies in BGE’s gas system safety inspection program raised by former BGE employees. Those allegations centered on, but were not limited to, the actions of another former BGE employee whose job had been to inspect gas system construction work by contractors and whom the company had terminated in 2024 for documented failure to perform his duties. OPC’s request filed this week asks for clarification of the scope of the investigation; an expansion of its scope, if needed; and an order requiring BGE to produce information that BGE so far has refused to provide.
As OPC’s motion explains, the Commission judge did not limit the scope of the investigation to particular gas infrastructure or a specific timeframe despite BGE’s repeated argument for a narrow focus of the investigation. Nevertheless, BGE has refused requests by OPC and Commission staff seeking information about most capital construction work, on the theory that the scope of the case is limited to BGE’s corrosion control, leak repair, and proactive service replacement and the 2022-2024 timeframe.
OPC’s motion includes an affidavit from a technical expert explaining that the company’s oversight of contractors is inadequate, at least for the maintenance work for which BGE has provided information. Rather than employ qualified third-party independent inspectors or company staff to fully supervise critical construction tasks performed by contracted construction firms, BGE allows those contractors to inspect their own work while conducting spot-checks to ensure contract compliance, the affidavit explains, noting that BGE’s contractor oversight consists primarily of reviewing paperwork or post-work reports instead of physically verifying the work before burial.
“The evidence gathered in this investigation so far raises significant concerns with BGE’s gas infrastructure inspection protocols,” Lapp said. “Regardless of whether the order initiating the investigation encompassed our view of its scope, the evidence we have so far warrants expanding the scope of this proceeding to include all of BGE’s gas infrastructure programs.”
The Maryland Office of People’s Counsel is an independent state agency that represents Maryland’s residential consumers of electric, natural gas, telecommunications, private water and certain transportation matters before the Public Service Commission, federal regulatory agencies and the courts.
* * *
|
