DBI Audit Narrows Soft-Story Retrofit Gas-line Concern to 75 Properties; PG&E Agrees to Upgrades

The Department of Building Inspection presented a draft audit of the mandatory soft-story retrofit program and the results of a multi-step investigation into whether natural gas service lines run through new grade beams or other reinforced concrete foundation elements.

Jeff Buckley, DBI27s policy and public affairs director, said staff began with the full universe of soft-story retrofit projects and used inspection records, plan reviews and coordination with PG&E to progressively narrow the list: properties without reinforced beams were removed, PG&E casing and replacement records removed additional addresses, manual plan reviews and Google Earth checks further narrowed the list, and in-person inspections reduced the set to addresses that required confirmation.

Buckley said PG&E27s records and field verification left DBI with 75 addresses that "could not be ruled out" as potentially having a gas service intersecting new concrete. DBI emphasized that its inspectors found records showing the retrofits were performed according to code and that an "abundance of caution" motivated the follow-up work. Buckley said DBI and PG&E will send a joint letter and coordinate owner and tenant notification prior to any construction work.

Lauren Wilson, PG&E27s government affairs director for San Francisco, and Derek Kent, distribution gas engineer, told the commission PG&E has capacity to perform the required service-line upgrades and targeted completion of the replacements by the end of 2022, contingent on city cooperation for permits and any encroachment work in the public right-of-way. Kent described typical remedies: moving meters outside the structure if feasible or inserting modern plastic gas piping through existing steel services and venting casing at the curb box.

Commissioners asked for clarity on the audit27s scope and lessons learned: how many foundations had been poured without PG&E sign-off, where coordination broke down, and whether the department could have done more during prior inspections to detect the condition. DBI staff acknowledged data and process gaps and said lessons learned include improved coordination with PG&E, inspector training tied to the updated information sheet, and clearer job-card documentation. DBI said they had not yet notified the 75 property owners or tenants and planned to time notification to be effective ahead of any construction.

Commissioners and public commenters raised concerns about cost, tenant disruption during replacements, and whether small property owners would be able to comply. PG&E said outages would be temporary and that paving restoration and scheduling can be a pain point; agency staff said they did not expect the city to fund the upgrades and that costs would be addressed through PG&E27s regular replacement programs or individual service work.

DBI said the draft report would be finalized after comments and transmitted to the Board of Supervisors, with DBI and PG&E facilitating permits and inspections needed to complete any remaining work.