Damage Prevention PHMSA’s PerspectivePHMSA’s …€¦ · U.S. Department of Transportation...

U.S. Department of TransportationPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Damage Prevention Damage Prevention PHMSA’s PerspectivePHMSA’s PerspectivePHMSA’s PerspectivePHMSA’s Perspective

David SpanglerCATS CoordinatorOffice of Pipeline Safety(202) [email protected]


Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview

• PHMSA’s perspective on damage prevention

• Variability in state damage prevention programsy g p p g

• PHMSA's Damage Prevention Assistance Program (DPAP)

• PHMSA’s role in damage prevention and the nine elements of an effective damage prevention programof an effective damage prevention program

• Damage Prevention Initiatives

• State Damage Prevention Grants

• Public Awareness

• PHMSA’s 3rd party excavator enforcement rulemaking

f• Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance (PIPA)


PHMSAPHMSAPipeline Safety MissionPipeline Safety MissionPipeline Safety MissionPipeline Safety Mission

The Office of Pipeline Safety is the Federal safety authority p y y yfor ensuring the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound operation of the Nation's pipeline transportation system.

- 3 -


CATSCATS


CATSCATSCATSCATS

Community Assistance and Technical Services ProgramTechnical Services Program


CATS MissionCATS Mission

The mission of the OPS Community Assistance & Technical Services (CATS) team is an ambitious one:Technical Services (CATS) team is an ambitious one:

To advance public safety, environmental protection and pipeline reliability by facilitating clear communications

among all pipeline stakeholders including the public the among all pipeline stakeholders, including the public, the operators and government officials.

- 6 -


h // h d /h // h d /http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/

- 7 -


Damage PreventionDamage PreventionAn IntroductionAn Introduction


Damage PreventionDamage PreventionPHMSA’s PerspectivePHMSA’s Perspective

• PHMSA’s focus is pipelines, but…

• Damage prevention for pipelines is damage prevention for • Damage prevention for pipelines is damage prevention for all utilities – damage prevention takes place on our common ground

• All stakeholders must be involved • All stakeholders must be involved

• The elements of a good damage prevention program are spelled out in the PIPES Act of 2006 – “The 9 Elements”

• Comprehensive state damage prevention programs, including effective enforcement lowers the risks


Why Does PHMSA Care?Why Does PHMSA Care?

• When a pipeline is damaged • When a pipeline is damaged during excavation, people are almost always nearby

• Reducing excavation damage to pipelines furthers PHMSA’s mission of ensuring the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound operation of the Nation’s pipeline transportation system


Why Does PHMSA Care?Why Does PHMSA Care?• Excavation damage is the leading cause of “serious”

pipeline incidents. (causing injury or fatality)— In 2007, excavation damages caused 20% of pipeline

i id t incidents

— These incidents resulted in 4 fatalities, 10 injuries, and $3.5 M in damages*

E ca ation damage impacts all othe nde g o nd tilities • Excavation damage impacts all other underground utilities, causing service outages, affecting lives, and costing untold millions of dollars

* Source: PHMSA Significant Incidents Files April 14, 2008


Why Does PHMSA Care?Why Does PHMSA Care?• Over two million miles of pipelines in the U.S. p p

(enough to circle the earth 83 times)

– 170,000 miles of hazardous liquid pipelines

295 220 miles of gas transmission pipelines – 295,220 miles of gas transmission pipelines

– 1,900,000 miles of natural gas distribution pipelines

– 109 LNG plants connected to our natural gas transmission and distribution systems

– Propane distribution pipelines

• These pipelines are operated by more than 3,000 companies, large and small

• Natural gas provides 24% of U S total energy • Natural gas provides 24% of U.S. total energy consumption; petroleum provides another 39%


Data TrendsData TrendsData TrendsData Trends


Data TrendsData Trends


Characterizing State Damage Characterizing State Damage Prevention ProgramsPrevention Programs

Variability in State Damage Variability in State Damage Prevention ProgramsPrevention Programs

• Damage prevention is a shared responsibility, but damage prevention is largely executed atbut damage prevention is largely executed at state and local levels

• There is considerable variability between the provisions of state damage prevention laws…p g p


OCSI OneOCSI One--Call Laws SummaryCall Laws Summary

* Source:2009-2010 OCSI Resource Guide (p. 19)

All States Have a Damage All States Have a Damage Prevention LawPrevention LawPrevention LawPrevention Law

Source: One-Call Systems International Committee of the Common Ground Alliance

Statewide Coverage?Statewide Coverage?


Mandatory Membership?Mandatory Membership?


Civil Penalty Provision?Civil Penalty Provision?


Tolerance ZonesTolerance Zones


Hand Dig Clause?Hand Dig Clause?


Mandatory Premark?Mandatory Premark?


Emergency Clause?Emergency Clause?


Positive Response Required?Positive Response Required?


Excavator Permit Issued?Excavator Permit Issued?


Damage Reporting?Damage Reporting?


DOT Exemption?DOT Exemption?


Depth Exemption?Depth Exemption?


Homeowner Exemption?Homeowner Exemption?


Railroad Exemption?Railroad Exemption?


Agricultural Exemption?Agricultural Exemption?



Characterizing State Damage Characterizing State Damage Prevention ProgramsPrevention Programs

• Maps help to demonstrate the variability that exists in state damage prevention laws

• PHMSA promotes implementation of the “nine elements” of effective damage prevention programs outlined in the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement and Safety (PIPES) Act of 2006Enforcement and Safety (PIPES) Act of 2006

• States should:

—review their programs p g

—compare performance against the nine elements

—take appropriate action

• One size DOES NOT fit all


PHMSAPHMSADamage Prevention AssistanceDamage Prevention AssistanceDamage Prevention Assistance Damage Prevention Assistance

Program (DPAP)Program (DPAP)


Damage Prevention TransparencyDamage Prevention Transparency

• PHMSA’s goal is to strengthen state damage prevention programs

• PHMSA needs clear documentation of state programs to o o o p og oexplain funding decisions and to show progress over time

• Characterizing state damage prevention programs compared to the nine elements, NOT compared to each

thother

– UNDER DEVELOPMENT: Utilizing CGA best practices, recommendations from NAPSR, some of the DIMP Phase I report, and PHMSA staff inputI report, and PHMSA staff input

• Documenting strengths and weakness (aspects of the programs that work well and areas that need improvement – relative to the nine elements)


Nine Elements of EffectiveNine Elements of EffectiveDamage Prevention ProgramsDamage Prevention Programs

1. Effective communication between operators and excavators from excavation notification to completion of excavation

2 Fostering support and partnership of all stakeholders 2. Fostering support and partnership of all stakeholders 3. Operators’ use of performance measures for locators4. Partnership in employee training5 P t hi i bli d ti5. Partnership in public education6. A dispute resolution process that defines the

enforcement agency as a partner and facilitator7 Fair and consistent enforcement of the law7. Fair and consistent enforcement of the law8. Use of technology to improve the locating process 9. Data analysis to continually improve

program effectivenessprogram effectiveness


Nine Elements GuidanceNine Elements Guidance• DIMP Phase I Report in 2005

• PIPES Act of 2006

• AGA, AGC, AOPL, INGAA, and NUCA - Excavation Damage Prevention Initiative (EDPI) and produced a draft paper, ( ) p p p“Guide to the 9 Elements,” in 2007.

• NAPSR - Suggested Criteria For Meeting the 9 Elements Of An Effective Damage Prevention Program (July 31, 2007)

• PHMSA - Damage Prevention Assistance Program (DPAP) Guide (September 2008)

http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/publications/DPAP-Guide-FirstEdition-20080911.pdf


PHMSA Damage Prevention InitiativesPHMSA Damage Prevention Initiatives• Support one-call centers

– In every state – Call before you dig

Di l 811 A t ti ti t ll– Dial 811 – Automatic routing to your one-call

• Support Common Ground Alliance

– All underground utilities

– 15 stakeholder groups

– Focus on best practices, education, research & development, data collection, one-call centers, and pregional partnerships

– Participate in Regional CGA


PHMSA Damage Prevention InitiativesPHMSA Damage Prevention Initiatives

• PHMSA Community Assistance and Technical Services (CATS) program— Facilitate clear communications among all pipeline

stakeholders, including the public, operators, and government officials

• One-call technology pilot project• One call technology pilot project— Using GPS in Virginia to enhance

one-call communications• Pipeline operator public awareness programsp p p p g

— Our regulations require pipeline operators provide pipeline safety awareness messages to several stakeholder audiences



• Research and Development program— $3 7M to date from PHMSA and industry on — $3.7M to date from PHMSA and industry on

strengthening standards, technology developments, and developing knowledge documents

• Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance (PIPA)— Developing guidance for land development in the

vicinity of transmission pipelines



• Grants to States

– Base grantsBase grants

– One-call grants

– State Damage Prevention grants

Implementing or enhancing the nine elements in state damage prevention programs


State Damage Prevention GrantsState Damage Prevention Grants• Eligibility: • Eligibility:

— Any State authority (including a municipality with respect to intrastate gas pipeline transportation) that is or will be responsible for preventing damage to or will be responsible for preventing damage to underground pipeline facilities as long as the State participates in the oversight of pipeline transportation pursuant to an annual 49 U.S.C. §60105 certification or 49 U S C §60106 i ff i h PHMSA49 U.S.C. §60106 agreement in effect with PHMSA

— Written designation by the Governor

• Funding:Funding:

— $1.5M annual budget, $100K maximum award

• Calendar year cycle (award by January, complete by Decembe of same ea )December of same year)

• Competitive program


Review Committee (11 Members)Review Committee (11 Members)

• Two representatives of NAPSR

• Two representatives of excavators; one from AGC d f NUCAand one from NUCA

• Two representatives of State one call centers

• One representative of AGA• One representative of AGA

• One representative of INGAA

• One representative of AOPL• One representative of AOPL

• One PHMSA CATS Manager

• One representative of PHMSA State Programsp g

CY 2008 SDP Grant Recipients

$100 000$31 740

$99,440

$100,000

$100,000$100,000

$100,000$31,740

$73 667

$57,750

$100,000$100,000

$100,000

$73,667$100,000

$100,000$64,900

$100,000

15 awards totaling $1,327,497

CY 2009 SDP Grant Recipients

$100 000$82,044

$84,120

$100,000

$100,000

$100 000

$39,000

$100,000

$100 000

$99,462

$91,800$87,870

$100,000

$84,100

$78,000

12 awards totaling $1,058,086


Calendar Year 2010 SDP GrantsCalendar Year 2010 SDP Grants

• Third year of grant program

• Evaluations based on new set of criteria; some similar to 2008/2009, some different

• One round of solicitation and evaluation

li i i f li i b bli h d l• Solicitation for applications to be published July 2009

• Awards final by December 2009

• Period of performance 1/1/2010 12/31/2010• Period of performance 1/1/2010 – 12/31/2010


Pipeline Safety Information Grants toPipeline Safety Information Grants toPipeline Safety Information Grants to Pipeline Safety Information Grants to Communities Communities –– a.k.a. Technical a.k.a. Technical

Assistance Grants (TAGs)Assistance Grants (TAGs)• Authorized by PIPES Act (49 U.S.C. § 60130)

$1M b d d f 2009 $50 000 i d

Assistance Grants (TAGs)Assistance Grants (TAGs)

• $1M budgeted for 2009; $50,000 maximum award to a community or pipeline safety non-profit

• First three grants must be “demonstration” grants; $25,000 g g ; $ ,maximum award each

• Goal is to fund exploration of engineering and other scientific analysis of pipeline safety issues including the scientific analysis of pipeline safety issues, including the promotion of public participation in official proceedings

• Awardees must make findings available to relevant operators and foster open communication between operators and foster open communication between interested parties


ddi i l Sddi i l SAdditional PHMSAAdditional PHMSADamage Prevention AssistanceDamage Prevention Assistancegg

Other forms of assistance could include, for example: – Host and facilitate neutral meetings– Work with national trade associations and engage state – Work with national trade associations and engage state

level representatives– Provide letters of support for improving state programs– Provide guidanceProvide guidance– Conduct a program gap analysis– Contact stakeholders and coordinate support

Participate in state level conferences and meetings– Participate in state level conferences and meetings– Utilize HQ and Community Assistance & Technical

Services (CATS) resources for presentations


Public AwarenessPublic AwarenessAPI API -- RP 1162RP 1162


PHMSA’s Damage Prevention PHMSA’s Damage Prevention Enforcement RulemakingEnforcement Rulemaking


Federal Damage Federal Damage Prevention EnforcementPrevention Enforcement

• The PIPES Act maintains the existing role of the States as having primary responsibility for one call enforcement g p y p yagainst excavators, and supports the States by providing additional grant funds

• The PIPES Act gives PHMSA limited Federal enforcement authority over excavators in States that do not have or are not exercising enforcement authority, but requires rulemaking before direct Federal authority can be used

• PHMSA will issue an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on the enforcement issue, target date is June 2009


PIPES ACT OF 2006PIPES ACT OF 2006

SEC. 2. PIPELINE SAFETY AND DAMAGE PREVENTION.

(f) LIMITATION The Secretary may not conduct an (f) LIMITATION.—The Secretary may not conduct an enforcement proceeding under subsection (d) for a violation within the boundaries of a State that has the authority to impose penalties described in section 60134(b)(7) against p p ( )( ) gpersons who violate that State’s damage prevention laws, unless the Secretary has determined that the State’s enforcement is inadequate to protect safety, consistent with this chapter and until the Secretary issues through a this chapter, and until the Secretary issues, through a rulemaking proceeding, the procedures for determining inadequate State enforcement of penalties.


F d l DF d l DFederal Damage Federal Damage Prevention EnforcementPrevention Enforcement

PHMSA must:• Establish procedures for determining whether a State’s

f i i denforcement program is inadequate

• Establish administrative procedures for the State to contest a notice of inadequacy

• Establish minimum Federal standards for excavators that PHMSA would enforce in a State found to be inadequate

• Establish adjudication process in the event an excavator is cited by PHMSA


Federal DamageFederal DamageFederal Damage Federal Damage Prevention EnforcementPrevention Enforcement

What enforcement models seem to work nationwide?• A designated enforcement authority other than the

Attorney General

• An equitable and rational enforcement model that is qeither traditional (enforcement authority leads) or by committee (committee partners with enforcement authority)

• Field enforcement by a party other than local law enforcement

• …


Federal DamageFederal DamageFederal Damage Federal Damage Prevention EnforcementPrevention Enforcement

FYI, the PIPES Act Also States:• One call use is mandatory for excavators in states with

llone call centers

• An excavator who causes damage to a pipeline facility that may endanger life or cause serious bodily harm or d t tdamage to property:

• Must promptly report the damage to the owner or operator of the facility; and

• If the damage results in the escape of any flammable, toxic, or corrosive gas or liquid, the excavator:

• Must promptly report to other appropriate p p y p pp pauthorities by calling 911


Pipelines and Pipelines and Informed Planning Informed Planning

Alliance (PIPA)Alliance (PIPA)Alliance (PIPA)Alliance (PIPA)


Population EncroachmentPopulation Encroachment

The Pipeline Safety Improvement Act 2002 (PSIA) required DOT and FERC to study land use practices, zoning study land use practices, zoning ordinances, and preservation of environmental resources relative to transmission pipeline ROW and

i tmaintenance.



Information from study to be used to:

• Determine effective practices to limit encroachment on transmission pipeline ROW.

• Address and prevent hazards and risks to public, workers, p p , ,and environment associated with ROW encroachment.

• Raise awareness of the risks and hazards of encroachment.

• Address preservation of environmental resources while maintaining ROW, recognizing pipeline operators’ regulatory obligations.



Study, TRB Special Report 281, September 2004

Recommendations to PHMSA:—Develop risk-informed land use guidanceDevelop risk-informed land use guidance.—Involve all stakeholders.—Include expertise in risk analysis, risk communication,

land use management, and developing regulation.—Ensure process is transparent, independent, and peer

reviewed.—Refine the guidance over time.

Recommendations to transmission pipeline industry:—Develop best practices for specification, acquisition,

development, and maintenance of transmission pipeline ROWROW.


i li d f di li d f dPipelines and Informed Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance (PIPA)Planning Alliance (PIPA)

• January, 2008 – PHMSA hosted the inaugural meeting of the Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance (PIPA)

gg

• Approximately 130 people attended the meeting and are participating in the PIPA effort.

• PIPA is a partnership of stakeholders whose purpose is to further enhance pipeline safety

• PIPA focus – to develop more detailed guidance for property development in the vicinity of transmission pipelines.


i li d f di li d f dPipelines and Informed Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance (PIPA)Planning Alliance (PIPA)

PIPA is:

Through PIPA, stakeholders are engaging each other to develop best practices for property development adjacent to transmission pipelines.

gg

PIPA is: • Investigating existing best practices and different

stakeholder needs and challenges• Seeking consensus to develop practical guidance on:g p p g

—Land use policies —Range of appropriate land uses—Setbacks and other measures—Setbacks and other measures

• Discussing topics and approaches to include: —Model local zoning ordinances and subdivision

regulationsregulations—Model planning policies—Model state legislation


PIPA T k TPIPA T k T• Protecting Communities – What should pipeline safety

PIPA Task TeamsPIPA Task TeamsProtecting Communities What should pipeline safety stakeholders do, or avoid doing, adjacent to the pipeline right-of-way to reduce the risk to communities?

• Protecting Transmission Pipelines – What should pipeline safety stakeholders do, or avoid doing, on the right-of-way to reduce the risk to transmission pipelines while preserving environmental resources?

• Communication – How should the risks to transmission pipelines and communities be communicated among pipeline safety stakeholders?pipeline safety stakeholders?


• Followed a discussion and consensus agreement process.

PIPA Task TeamsPIPA Task TeamsFollowed a discussion and consensus agreement process.

• Pursued respective goals separately via series of telephone and web-assisted conferences.

• Supported by a mid-point face-to-face meeting to discuss cross-team issues and ensure initiative was on track.


Baseline Recommended Practices

PIPA ReportPIPA Report

These practices should be implemented to prepare stakeholders for either future community development or new transmission pipeline siting.

New Pipeline Recommended PracticesPipeline operators should implement these pe e ope ato s s ou d p e e t t esepractices when planning the route for new transmission pipelines.

New Development Recommended New Development Recommended PracticesStakeholders should implement these practices when new development is proposed in the vicinity of transmission proposed in the vicinity of transmission pipelines.


PIPA ReportPIPA Report

The practices are grouped by the stakeholder audiencetaking action. In addition to the information contained in the scenario section, a Practice Description expands on the , p pPractice Statement to provide additional details. The audience sections provide practices for key stakeholders:

• Local Government• Local Government

• Property Developer/Owner

• Pipeline Operator

• Real Estate Commission


PIPA ReportPIPA Report• Completion of the PIPA Final Report anticipated July 2009.• Final PIPA Report will be integrated into an interactive

application on PHMSA’s Stakeholder Communications websitewebsite.

• Stakeholder’s will be encouraged to refer to website for land use planning guidance and to link to it from their own websites.websites.

• Use of website will enhance ability to accommodate and make available future revisions.make available future revisions.


SummarySummary

• Data shows progress and the trends are positive; effectived i ill hdamage prevention will strengthen trends

• Many damage prevention initiatives are well underway

• PHMSA wants to help states improve their damage prevention programs through the “nine elements”

• PHMSA can provide administrative and financial support to p ppstates to improve their damage prevention programs

• Fair, transparent and accountable enforcement is critical to an adequate state damage prevention programq g p p g


Thank YouThank You

David Spangler(202) 366-5064(202) 366-5064

[email protected]

htt // i i h d t / /D P tihtt // i i h d t / /D P tihttp://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/DamagePreventiohttp://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/DamagePrevention.htmn.htm

Questions?Questions?

Damage Prevention PHMSA’s PerspectivePHMSA’s …€¦ · U.S. Department of Transportation...

Documents

Transcript of Damage Prevention PHMSA’s PerspectivePHMSA’s …€¦ · U.S. Department of Transportation...