Loading...
CC - Item 7A - Possible Support for California Public Utilities Commission Following SB 1371 r E M M . 4. ! lf. � ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BILL R. MANIS, CITY MANAGER frj'-rN' DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 SUBJECT: POSSIBLE SUPPORT FOR CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOLLOWING SB 1371 (REQUESTED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK) SUMMARY This item is presented to the City Council at the request of Councilmember Clark. Please see a letter of support from the Blue Green Alliance (Attachment A), a proposed draft letter of from the City (Attachment 13), and the Natural Gas Leakage Abatement Summary of Best Practices. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Discuss and provide direction to staff. FISCAL IMPACT -None PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. Prepared by: Air. Marc Donohue.City Clerk Attachment A: Letter of Support—Blue Green Alliance Attachment 13: Draft Letter of Support—City of Rosemead Attachment C: Natural Gas Leakage Abatement Summary of Best Practices ITEM NUMBER: 7A BLUECIREEN A L L I A N C E March 31,2016 Michael Picker, President California Public Unities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco,CA 94102 Re: Staff Recommendations on Natural Gas Leakage Abatement following SB 1371(Leno,2014) Dear President Picker: On behalf of the above organizations,we write to thank you for your leadership on climate change and .I to express our support for the staff recommendations on the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) rulemaking(R. 15-01-008)on natural gas leakage abatement as discussed in 561371(Leno, 2014). The CPUC staff recommendations call for better training programs,more trained,experienced personnel in the field,better leak detection processes,and a defined timeline to fix known leaks. These recommendations, if adopted and implemented as proposed,will reduce the risk of damage to the environment and workplaces from explosions,air pollution and other climate change impacts while simultaneously employing California workers. Natural gas is an integral part of California's energy portfolio and economy—over 12 million households in the state heat their homes,food and water with it—and it accounts for more than 40 percent of the state's electricity production.Statewide,utilities maintain more than 150,000 miles of natural gas distribution pipe serving homes,apartments and businesses. Unfortunately,as Aliso Canyon demonstrated,It is more critical than ever that we take action to protect Californians from the dangers of natural gas pollution. In 2014,the Governor signed the Gas Pipeline Leak Repair and Emissions Reduction Act(513 1371)to 'I require all public utilities and storage providers In California to use the most advanced technology to find leaks,and require them to repair the leaks they find.The CPUC was then tasked to determine and to implement best practices for leak identification, repair,and avoidance,as well as better accounting of the climate change impact of natural gas leaks in the distribution systems throughout our cities and communities. On March 24,the CPUC issued staff recommendations on best practices for natural gas leak detection and repair. These recommendations represent a new way of doing things to include changes to policies and practices, better training programs,new job classifications and staffing levels,and better leak detection processes,and a defined timeline to fix known leaks. These rules are sorely needed. For example,in 2014 the Southern California Gas Company reported a backlog in repairing of over 9,400 leaks,of which more than 1,000 may wait a year or longer to be fixed. • Furthermore,more than 2.4 million(out of 5.9 million) natural gas services—which connect buildings to gas mains—have been identified as leak-prone. While the majority of these leaks may not pose an immediate threat to life and property,significant climate change and air pollution impacts of methane leaks natural gas systems are increasingly coming Into focus. Methane—the primary component of natural gas—is a significant contributor to climate change.The uncontrolled emissions from leaky pipes and components are estimated to be the equivalent of millions of cars on the road.Worse yet,many of these leaks are in proximity to homes, schools,hospitals,and other public facilities where they may develop into larger leaks that can pose more of an immediate hazard. We applaud CPUC's draft recommendations to minimize methane emissions from the natural gas transmission and distribution system. These recommendations are a significant and necessary step to reducing,finding and fixing natural gas leaks. Thank you again for your leadership on climate change. We welcome you in joining us to see that these recommendations are adopted by the CPUC and implemented by the utilities. Sincerely, California BlueGreen Nliance C:Elizaveta Malashenko, Director of Safety and Enforcement,California Public Utilities Commission ( Auy'oR: a City of c pse1IW� MAYOR PRO TEN: Po tem 4 017114;7 5838 P. V AI 1 LY But I I V ARIL CO BOX 39P ItOSLMF I) ( AI II r)RINp 91'30 ('111 NCH.ARCON I: TEl I PITON F (626 369--?IIIU VlA ART(LARK FAX 167613111-9218 �1ARA MALT(_URA srs lob September 13, 2016 Michael Picker, President California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 RE: Staff Recommendations on Natural Gas Leakage Abatement following SB 1371 (Leno) Dear President Picker: We write to thank you for your leadership on climate change and to express our support for the staff recommendations on the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) rulemaking on natural gas leakage abatement as discussed in SB 1371. The CPUC staff recommendations call for better training programs, more trained, experience personnel in the field, better leak detection processes, and a defined timeline to fix known leaks. These recommendations, if adopted and implemented as proposed, will reduce the risk of damage to the environment and workplaces from explosions, air pollution and other climate change impacts while simultaneously employing California workers. Natural gas is an integral part of California's energy portfolio and economy — over 12 million households in the state heat their homes, food and water with it—and it accounts for more than 40 percent of the state's electricity production. Statewide, utilities maintain more than 150,000 miles of natural gas distribution pipe serving homes, apartments and businesses. Unfortunately, as Aliso Canyon demonstrated, it is more critical than ever that we take action to protect Californians from the dangers of natural gas pollution. In 2014, the Governor signed the Gas Pipeline Leak Repair and Emissions Reduction Act (SB 1371) to require all public utilities and storage providers in California to use the most advanced technology to find leaks, and require them to repair the leaks they find. The CPUC was then tasked to determine and to implement best practices for leak identification, repair, and avoidance, as well as better accounting of the climate change impact of natural gas leaks in the distribution systems throughout our cities and communities. On March 24, the CPUC issued staff recommendations on best practices for natural gas leak detection and repair. These recommendations represent a new way of doing things to include changes to policies and practices, better training programs, new job classifications and staffing levels. and better leak detection processes, and a defined timeline to fix known leaks. These rules are sorely needed. For example, in 2014 the Southern California Gas Company reported a backlog in repairing of over 9,400 leaks, of which more than 1,000 may wait a year or longer to be fixed. Furthermore, more than 2.4 million (out of 5.9 million) natural gas services — which connect buildings to gas mains—have been identified as leak-prone. While the majority of these leaks may not pose an immediate threat to life and property, significant climate change and air pollution impacts of methane leaks natural gas systems are increasingly coming into focus. Methane —the primary component of natural gas- is a significant contributor to climate change. The uncontrolled emissions from leaky pipes and components are estimated to be the equivalent of millions of cars on the road. Worse yet, many of these leaks are in proximity to homes, schools,hospitals. and other public facilities where they may develop into larger leaks that can pose more of an immediate hazard. We applaud CPUC's draft recommendations to minimize methane emissions from the natural gas transmission and distribution system. These recommendations are a significant and necessary step to reducing,finding, and fixing natural gas leaks. Thank you again for your leadership on climate change. We welcome you in joining us to see that these recommendations are adopted by the CPUC and implemented by the utilities. Sincerely, Sandra Armenia Mayor CC: Elizaveta Malashenko,Director of Safety and Enforcement, California Public Utilities Commission California Public Utilities Commission and California Air Resources Board Natural Gas Leakage Abatement Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities And Staff Recommendations In partial fulfillment of Senate Bill 1371 (Leno, 2014) & Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR) 15-01 -008 Elizabeth Scheehle, CARE Winardi Setiawan, CARB Charles Magee, CPUC March 2016 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 2 IDENTIFICATION OF BEST PRACTICES 3 RECOMMENDATIONS 9 ATTACHMENTS 22 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared by California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and California Air Resources Board staff. It does not necessarily represent the views of the CPUC, its Commissioners, the CARB, or the State of California. The CPUC, CARB, the State of California, its employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warrant, expressed or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the CPUC or the CARB, nor have the agencies passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.1S-01-008 Page 1 of 22 INTRODUCTION Methane is a greenhouse gas (GHG) 72 times more potent than carbon dioxide on a 20 year timeframe. Researchers have identified the oil and gas industry as a significant source of methane emissions. In California, Senate Bill (SB) 1371 (Leno, 2014) was signed by Governor Brown on September 21, 2014, to reduce methane emissions from leaks in the gas transmission, distribution and storage facilities in California. SB 1371 adds Article 3 (commencing with Section 975) to Chapter 4.5 of Part 1 of Division 1 of the Public Utilities Code. Included in Article 3 is Section 975. (e) (4) which states, in part, that the Commission shall: "(4) Establish and require the use of best practices for leak surveys, patrols, leak survey technology, leak prevention, and leak reduction. The commission shall consider in the development of best practices the quality of materials and equipment." In addition, SB 1371 states, "The bill would require the commission to commence a proceeding by January 15, 2015, to adopt those rules and procedures, in consultation with the State Air Resources Board'." In January 2015, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC or Commission) launched Rulemaking (R.) 15-01-008 in response to SB 1371 to investigate new technologies in gas leak detection in the transmission, distribution and storage process, specifically optimizing for methane reductions.' The July 24, 2015, Scoping Memo and Assigned Commissioner Ruling (Scoping Memo) for this rulemaking states, ' This is a reference to the California State Air Resources Board (CARB). 2"Order Instituting Rulemaking to Adopt Rules and Procedures Governing Commission-Regulated Natural Gas Pipelines and Facilities to Reduce Natural Gas Leakage Consistent with Senate Bill 1371," issued January 22,2015. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 2 of 22 "CARB will work with the Commission to determine the best management practices and other mitigation technologies for achieving GHG reductions. CARB will collaborate with the Commission and provide GHG expertise throughout the proceeding. The two agencies will ensure, on ongoing bases, that both the public safety and the State's climate change goals will be achieved."' This report describes the process and results of CPUC/CARB exploration of best practices (BPs) for the reduction of methane leaks and emissions from utility gas systems. Under the direction of the Assigned Administrative Law Judge and in coordination with the Assigned Commissioner's Office, this process included several staff-conducted public workshops and the convening of a technical working group open to parties to the rulemaking. Disclaimer: Despite the effort to be inclusive and collaborative during the working group process, this document and its recommendations are not to be considered a consensus report. Instead it represents CPUC/CARB staff proposals for adoption, and will be subject to comments by Parties to the rulemaking before being forwarded to the CPUC for consideration. IDENTIFICATION OF BEST PRACTICES In 2014 and 2015, Safety and Enforcement Division (SED) staff researched BPs for the identification and mitigation of leaks from the utility gas system. The research included intemet searches and personal contacts with vendors, utilities, research organizations and regulators, in both the United States and overseas. On March 18, 2015, ALJ Kersten issued a ruling entering the SED staff report, titled "Survey of 3 Scoping Memo,p. 16. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities - R.15-01-008 Page 3 of 22 Natural Gas Leakage Abatement Best Practices", dated March 17, 2015, into the record. The purpose of this paper was to identify technologies and practices presently in use, technologies and practices which are new and/or currently not in use in California, and those which are in various stages of research and development (R&D)? On July 24, 2015, the Scoping Memo for this rulemaking was issued. Two of the questions included in the Scoping Memo were: 5. Should the Commission require specific methods and technologies to detect and measure leaks? What BPs should be required? 6. How should preventive maintenance and operations and other efforts be employed to prevent leaks and other emissions, including third-party dig- ins?5 The Scoping Memo also established workshops,by stating, "This proceeding will hold workshops to discuss the leakage issues and the types of activities and metrics that are currently used or should be developed to detect, monitor, and repair such leaks. The workshops could also discuss potential ratemaking treatments to facilitate minimizing these leaks. These workshops will be led by the Commission's Safety and Enforcement Division (SED), in cooperation with CARB." The Scoping Memo further described the scope of the BPs workshop: "2. Working Group Workshop on Best Practices (Phase 1, Items 5 & 6) -Based on "target" emission sources, best practices to identify, measure, avoid and repair leaks discuss: • BPs to identify leaks; 'This report can be found on the CPUC Risk Assessment webpage at: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/riskassessment/ Scoping Memo at 13. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 4 of 22 • Best protocols, methods and procedures to quantify methane emissions and leaks; • Best preventive maintenance and operations practices to avoid and prevent leaks, emissions from blowdowns, operational emissions and other emissions, including third-party dig-ins; and • BPs to repair leaks (e.g. customer meters are a major source of leaks. What is a cost effective way to repair those?)" In compliance with the direction of the Scoping Memo, a workshop was held on October 27, 2015, where several parties made the following presentations:' • CPUC - Cost Effectiveness • Professor Joseph C. von Fischer of Colorado State University- Leak Quantification Using Mobile Sensors • Environmental Defense Fund -SED Workshop on Best Practices • Sempra- Natural Gas Leakage Workshop: Working Group Workshop on Best Practices • PG&E - Leak Abatement Best Practices Workshop: Implementing Best Practices and Ongoing R&D Projects • Southwest Gas - Best Practices Workshop R.15-01-008: Methane Leakage Subsequent to the workshop, meetings were held, by telephone and in person, to further zero in on the specific BPs preferred by the parties to identify and mitigate leaks and emissions. All parties were noticed and invited to participate in the working 6 All parties to the proceeding were invited to participate in the workshop and make presentations. All presentations can be found on the CPUC Risk Assessment webpage at: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/riskassessment/ Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 5 of 22 group. All teleconferences and meetings were well attended by the parties and their representatives.' In general, the parties felt that the meetings were productive. BPs meetings and topics of discussion were as follows: • December 8, 2015, teleconference: • Transmission Blowdowns and M&R Station Blowdowns • December 22, 2015, teleconference: • Compressor Stations-Leaks from Valves, Connections, Meters, Vents, Packing, Blowdowns, etc. • January 5, 2016, teleconference: • Storage-Control Vents, Leaks, Blowdowns, Storage Compressors, Casings, other sources of Leaks and Emissions. • January 19, 2016, meeting at the offices of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) at 123 Mission St., San Francisco: • Customer Meter and PHMSA "minor" releases (threaded connection leaks) AND Leak Surveys, Patrols, Leak Survey Technology, Leak Prevention, Leak Reduction, Leak Repair and Required Repair Times for Leaks. • "Know Your Risers" presentation by the Utility Workers Union of America, addressing the dangers of corroded anodeless 7 The parties who participated were Sempra Utilities,Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southwest Gas,Central Valley Storage,Lodi Gas Storage,Wild Goose Gas Storage, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the Utility Workers Union of America (UWUA), the Coalition of California Utility Employees (CCUE), the Utility Reform Network (TURN), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the CPUC Organization of Ratepayers Advocates(ORA) and the CPUC Risk Assessment Group. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 6 of 22 risers, a steel casing with a plastic pipe inside that carries the gas to the stop valve and meter assembly. • January 20, 2016, continuation meeting at the EDF offices: • Selection of BPs for the Working Group Proposal. • Cost Effectiveness-Discussion by Southern California Gas regarding the cost effectiveness methodology presented in the ICE Report titled, "Economic Analysis of Methane Emission Reduction Opportunities in the U.S. Onshore Oil and Natural Gas Industries", dated March 2014. • "Best Practices/Effective Results -Safe Harbor Proposal" presentation by the Independent Gas Storage Providers (ISPs) These working group meetings led to the creation of a consolidated spreadsheet, listing over 100 potential BPs for policies, practices and technologies that specifically relate to the system components and operational areas mentioned above., The spreadsheet briefly describes the proposed BPs, which parties proposed them, lists pros and cons, and -where information was readily available- estimated emissions that may be avoided through the use of the best practice and the potential costs of the measures. Additional comments about the proposed items that came up during the working group meetings are included, as well as a link to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Natural Gas STAR site in cases where the item is already identified as a Best Practice by the U.S. EPA. ,See Notes on Appendix A at the end of this document. Pa e 7 of 22 Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 g BPs are further identified by functional categories: Operational, Monitoring, Process/Program Development and Training, Existing/Standard Practices, Research& Development, Crossover (may apply to several categories) and Maintenance. Although there may be other ways to categorize the list, staff believes the functional categorization is most useful at this point in the process. The spreadsheet, which is proposed as an attachment to this document, is available on the SED Risk Assessment web site? The SED Risk Group also proposed that the Best Practices Working Group adopt the following Four Principles for Methane Leak Abatement Best Practices. The Four Principles shown below incorporate parties' informal comments to the extent that Staff agrees with them: Four Principles for Methane Leak Abatement Best Practices 1. BPs go beyond technologies and tools to embody a new way of doing things. Policies, practices and education are as important as new technologies, and may provide additional methane reduction opportunities at lower cost (e.g., The"Find it, fix it" policy for fixing leaks when found, in some cases, may be more cost effective than monitoring or returning later to fix the leak). 2. Industry standards for Safety and supplemental measures are needed to meet the challenge of eliminating methane emissions to the extent necessary to meet State goals. Refer to the Risk Assessment website at: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/riskassessment/ Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.1S-01-008 Page 8 of 22 3. If we can use the most advanced, technologically feasible, cost-effective measures to further reduce methane emissions beyond established targets, we should. 4. Improved methane detection by itself isn't enough; it should be coupled with better quantification and accurate categorization, and matched with a plan/timetable for mitigation in manners that are effective in minimizing the release of methane. It should be noted that these Principles represent a deeper iteration of one of six statutory principles that were listed in SB 1371, in that they will guide the effort to "(4) Establish and require the use of best practices for leak surveys, patrols, leak survey technology, leak prevention, and leak reduction."10 RECOMMENDATIONS At this time, after the exhaustive review of BPs described above, the CPUC and CARB are prepared to make the following BP recommendations. As stated in SB 1371, "The rules and procedures, including best practices and repair standards, shall be incorporated into the safety plans required by Section 961 and the applicable general orders adopted by the commission."" At this time, the only applicable general order adopted by the commission is G.O. 112, Revision F and future revisions. Whether and how these proposals, should they be adopted by the Commission, would be incorporated into a general order, has not yet been determined. 10 PU Code Section 975(e)(4). 11 SB-1371 Natural Gas:Leakage Abatement,Section. 2., Article 3.,975(f) Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 9 of 22 Mandatory Requirements There are mandatory minimum requirements proposed here that are intended to ensure that the utilities and gas storage operators are using BPs to reduce Methane leaks and emissions. Some of the minimum requirements are not BPs as identified in the spreadsheet,but are the policies, procedures, programs, instructions and training necessary to implement the BPs. In addition, it should be mandatory for all utilities to create and file with the CPUC and CARB, a compliance plan to compel the utilities to self-audit and certify what specific BPs they are using to mitigate methane leaks and emissions. There are also mandatory minimum BPs proposed that are aimed at mitigating two of the largest categories of methane emissions and leaks. Those categories are blowdowns and threaded connections". Further, there are several minimum required BPs for the detection of graded and ungraded leaks, and to mitigate the uncontrolled release of methane to the environment. All of the mandatory requirements have been proposed because they are either considered a crucial element to the success of the program (e.g., compliance, programs, training, etc.) or because they will detect or mitigate the largest volume of methane emitted and leaked (blowdowns, threaded fittings, graded and ungraded leaks, uncontrolled releases of methane). They also appear to be cost-effective, based on current utility experience or projected commercial cost (if still in R&D). " As identified in the Methane Leak Abatement Proceeding Workshop on Cost- Effectiveness and Best Management Practices (R.15-01-008),October 27, 2015. Refer to the Risk Assessment website at: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/riskassessment/ Pa e 10 of 22 Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 S CPUC/ CARB Approval and Audits The CPUC, in consultation with CARB, will approve the compliance plans and mandatory procedures and practices described in this document using a process to be determined later in this proceeding. Also, note that all components of this compliance plan will be subject to audit by the CPUC in consultation with CARB and/or third-party certifiers, using an audit process to be determined, including unannounced random field inspections. Voluntary Use of Best Practices All other BPs found in Attachment A of this document, or the March 18, 2015, report found on the Risk Assessment website?are considered voluntary and may be used as appropriate by the Respondents to meet the emission targets eventually adopted by the CPUC. As technologies change and improve, additional best practices may be added and/or made mandatory. 13 Refer to the Risk Assessment website at:http://www.cpuc.ca.gpv/riskassessment/ Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities - R.15-01-008 Page 11 of 22 Mandatory Requirements and Best Practices Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Policies and Procedures Written compliance plan identifying Regulatory Each company is of a different size January 31,2017 the policies,programs,procedures, Issue,Process and has a different business model. instructions,documents,etc.used to and Program In most cases,they are given the comply with the Final Decision in this Development flexibility to choose the BPs that are Proceeding(R15-01-005). Exact &Training cost-effective for them.However, wording TBD by the company and they must submit a compliance plan approved by the CPUC,in for approval by the CPUC/CARB to consultation with CARE. ensure that they are complying with the emission targets and decisions of this proceeding and SB 1371. Written company policy stating that Process and Written company policies are December 15,2016 methane is a potent GHG that must be Program needed to direct company activities prevented from escaping to the Development and hold employees accountable for atmosphere. Exact wording TBD by &Training violations of the policy. the company and approved by the CPUC,in consultation with CARE. Written company policy or procedure Process and 1 Written company policies are December 15,2016 stating that non-emergency venting of Program needed to direct company activities transmission lines and distribution Development and hold employees accountable for mains to atmosphere are only &Training violations of the policy. permitted after pressure inside the Purging lines has been reduced to the level specified in Procedure XXX. Exact wording TBD by the company and approved by the CPUC,in consultation with CARB. '..Elm= Page 12 of 22 Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities-R.15-01-006 B Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Policies and Procedures Written company policy or procedure Process and Written company policies are December 15,2016 stating that any project that requires Program needed to direct company activities evacuating methane must build time Development Sr and hold employees accountable into the project schedule to reduce Training for violations of the policy. methane by using one of the approved BPs found in Procedure XXX. Schedules of transmission line work shall also be submitted to facilitate audits,with line venting schedule updates TBD.Exact wording TBD by the company and approved by the CPUC,in consultation with CARB. Written company procedures Process and Written company procedures are December 15,2016 implementing the BPs approved for Program needed to direct company activities use to evacuate methane and how to Development& and hold employees accountable use them. Exact wording TBD by the Training for violations of the policy. company and approved by the CPUC, in consultation with CARB. - Written company policy that requires Process and Written company procedures are December 13,2016 that for any projects requiring Program needed to direct company activities evacuating methane,Work Planners Development& and hold employees accountable shall clearly delineate,in procedural Training for violations of the policy. • documents,such as work orders used in the field,the steps required to safely and efficiently reduce the pressure in the lines,prior to lines being vented. Exact wording TBD by the company and approved by the CPUC,in consultation with CARB. December 15,2016 Written company policy requiring Process and Requires coordination and bundling of work whenever possible Program awareness of construction, to prevent multiple venting of the Development& operations and maintenance same piping. Exact wording TBD by Training activities. Multiple blow-downs of the company and approved by the lines cause excess methane • CPUC,in consultation with CARB. emissions. Written company emergency Process and Storage facilities contain large December 15,2016 procedures which describe the actions Program volumes of methane. An company staff shall take to prevent • Development& uncontrolled release will negate the and/or stop the uncontrolled release of Training,IM methane reductions of other methane from the gas system or Crossover utilities,increase greenhouse gases storage facility. and endanger public health by . Exact wording TBD by the company releasing large amounts of odorant and approved by the CPUC,in and other toxic natural gas by- consultation with CARB. j products. 'tea Pa e 13 of 22 Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.1S-01-008 g Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Records Written Company Policy directing the Regulatory It is impossible to accurately report December 15,2016 gas business unit to maintain records Issue methane releases without this of all emissions and leaks,including information. It will also be used by the calculations used to derive the regulators during audits to ensure volume of methane released.Records compliance. are to be maintained in accordance with G.O.112 F and succeeding revisions,and 49 CFR 192. Currently, the record retention time in G.O.112 F is at least 75 years for the transmission - system. 49 CFR 192.1011 requires a • record retention time of at least 10 years for the distribution system. Exact wording TBD by the company and approved by the CPUC,in consultation with CARB. Training Training to ensure that personnel Process and Storage facilities contain large December 15,2016 know how to use company emergency Program volumes of methane. An procedures which describe the actions Development& uncontrolled release will negate the staff shall take to prevent and/or stop Training,IM methane reductions of other the uncontrolled release of methane Crossover utilities,increase greenhouse gases from the gas system or storage facility. and endanger public health by Training programs to be designed by releasing large amounts of odorant the Company and approved by the and other toxic natural gas by- CPUC,in consultation with CARE. products. Ensure that training programs educate Process and Training programs are necessary to December 15,2016 workers as to why it is necessary to Program help employees understand why it reduce,eliminate and/or prevent Development& is important to reduce methane methane emissions and leaks. Training emissions and leaks. If they Training programs to be designed by understand the issues,they are the Company and approved by the more likely to comply with the CPUC,in consultation with CARB. company's policies and procedures. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 14 of 22 Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Training Training/Mentoring/Knowledge Process and Alleviates knowledge gaps and January 31,2017 Transfer Programs to ensure Program improves safety. New workers knowledge continuity as workers(cave Development MUST be trained for safety reasons, and new workers are hired. Training, &Training in addition to limiting methane mentoring and knowledge transfer emissions. Knowledge transfer programs to be designed by the programs keep knowledge and Company and approved by the CPUC, important information flowing in consultation with CARB. through generations of employees. Create and implement training Process and Training programs are necessary for January 31,2017 programs to instruct workers on how Program the safety of workers and the public. to perform the BPs chosen,efficiently Development and safely. Training,mentoring and &'I raining knowledge transfer programs to be designed by the Company and approved by the CPUC,in consultation with CARB. Experienced,Trained Personnel Experienced,qualified people with Process and According to the Unions,there is a January 31,2017 field experience are needed. This is a Program significant need for experienced, general comment for all BPs. Create Development qualified people working in the field, new formal job classifications for &Training and also for participation in the apprentices,journeyman,specialists, evaluation of existing practices and etc where needed. Implement this development of better(best) practice in cooperation with the practices. Experienced gas system Unions. The CPUC,in consultation workers have first-hand knowledge with CARB will review the number of how gas system equipment and experience of employees in the operates,what the operation and field,as well as training and mentoring maintenance problems are and how programs,during audits. The audit to fix them resulting in less methane process will be developed later in this leaks. These are not entirely proceeding. hardware issues. Experienced workers are needed to help train, improve procedures,maintain and operate equipment and in the process,how to minimize methane leaks and emissions. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 15 of 22 Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Leak Detection Conduct leak surveys of the gas Monitoring Transition from 5 year leak surveys Begin surveys on distribution system outside business to 3 year leak surveys for the 3 year schedule by districts,every 3 years instead of every following parts of the gas system: January 31,2017 5 years,using modern,digital data 49 CFR 192.723-Distribution acquisition equipment(e.g.digital data systems:Leakage-surveys loggers),which can be downloaded to (b)(2)states,"A leakage survey with a central database. leak detector equipment must be conducted outside business districts as frequently as necessary,but at least once every 5 calendar years at intervals not exceeding 63 months." Further,research cited by both Colorado Air Quality Control Commission and the EPA indicates that more frequent inspections result in greater reductions of methane emissions". Leaks are found sooner and have less time to emit natural gas. The large gas utilities all appeared to be in favor of this change. More frequent leak surve s are •mmitted b the CFRs. Special Leak Surveys Monitoring Vintage Pipe is determined by Begin surveys by Vintage Pipe, Distribution Integrity material and date manufactured. January 31,2017 Management Program Surveys- The intent is to find leaks on conducted at least once per year and problematic infrastructure and up to 4 times per year,depending on components such as Aldyl"A" specific criteria. piping. Leak surveys to be conducted using modern,digital data acquisition equipment(e.g.digital data loggers), which can be downloaded to a central database. Pipe materials that are more susceptible to leaks should be replaced or modified to make safe(e.g.,cast iron or certain type of plastic pipe, unprotected steel. 14 In the ICF International Report,The Economic Analysis of Methane Emission Reduction Opportunities in the U.S.Onshore Oil and Natural Gas Industries", .a:es 3-9 thou 3-11 Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 16 of 22 Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Leak Detection Mobile methane mapping Monitoring Note: We are not requiring this Begin by technology. technology to be used until January,2018, January 31,2018 to allow time for the technology to be Strategic Mobile Methane Mapping perfected. It is very close to becoming Leveraging Existing Vehicle Fleet commercially available. Technology and/or use of mobile gas leak costs can also be considered in strategic detection. Vehicles used for this implementation. . purpose should be chosen in the most cost effective way. Vehicles Pros:-Able to identify more leaks in a that are rarely used are obviously given area,enabling the"Super Crew' not candidates for this technology. method of fixing leaks en masse,resulting in lower cost per repair. Mobile mapping equipment must -Increase the number of leaks found in a be capable of automatically very cost-efficient way. This new downloading leak data to a central technology is more sensitive and therefore database. finds more leaks. -Leverage miles already being driven by Leak maps shall be publicly Company vehicles. available with leaks displayed by -No incremental vehicle cost or vehicle zip code or other metric(number emissions. and type of leaks per zip code) -For SCG,4,000 Company vehicles driving 7,000 mi/yr—28 million miles Note:PG&E uses Picarro to find driven annually. and alert for leaks. If Picarro's -Develop an approach that is seamless to equipment senses methane the vehicle operator. concentration above 5 ppm,a -Use sensors on vehicle to gather and survey is conducted on foot to communicate all data automatically determine the source of the leak. -Develop methane/odorant detector to This methodology would be similar differentiate Pipeline gas. for all mobile gas leak detection , -Perform data analysis in centralized technology. location. -Large data volume may allow modeling of atmospheric methane levels across entire service territory. -Company vehicles usually drive in areas the companies have facilities. -Centrally coordinate standard work orders for Operations to investigate locations of concern. -Synergistic between Company operations. • Cons:-Algorithms and methods are still being improved to make the equipment more accurate and efficient. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 17 of 22 Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Leak Detection Stationary Methane Detectors for Monitoring Early warning is essential to reducing February 28,2018 Compressor Stations,Terminals,Gas the amount of methane emitted or Storage Facilities,or large leaked,especially at gas storage concentrations of equipment or piping. facilities which are unmanned. This is also a safety are especially useful at b'issue. Recent research unmanned facilities.facilities. Methane conducted for the Environmental detectors must alarm in manned Defense Fund(EDF)has identified control rooms or manned facilities.For inexpensive(410000),reliable underground storage facilities, stationary methane detectors. requirements would be harmonized Although they are still considered in with other monitoring requirements. R&D,it is anticipated that they will he commercially available by Feb. 2018. More frequent periodic possibly Monitoring Transmission facilities with a high February 28,2018 quarterly,leak detection and repair concentration of equipment and other (LDAR)inspections at above ground components are more prone to leaks transmission facilities with repair dates and vented emissions. In addition, determined by leak size. Schedule and since they are in a more concentrated scope to be determined. Use EPA area it is easier to perform leak Method 21,optical gas imaging,or surveys. Quarterly leak detection other methods for above ground and repair inspections are reasonable facilities/leaks. and most likely will be cost-effective. Use of hand-held detection devices to Monitoring, The most sensitive equipment finds February 28,2018 identify&quantify the sources of Existing/ the most leaks. There are many leaks. Standard devices available. Refer to the March Practices 18,2015 Best Practices Report, Appendix A on the Risk Assessment website under Recent Documents: htt : www. ucca.my riskassessme nt/. For example,a tunable laser spectrometer is under development by NASA. It is expected to be commercially available for<$5000. It will have a measuring sensitivity in the parts per billion(ppb)range. The newest equipment will be more reliable,lower maintenance and more sensitive compared to older technologies. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.1S-01-008 Page 18 of 22 Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Leak Repairs Repairing Grade 2 and Grade 3 leaks Monitoring PG&E is already repairing these October 1,2018 within certain timeframe(TBD),rather and within the first 15 month cycle. than keep monitoring. Maintenance PG&E has found this practice to be Practices cost-effective. "Find It Fix It Policy": Leak Repair Timeline and Backlogs "There will be initial costs,however once the program is in place,costs The Leak repair time for Grade 2 and are expected to decrease because Grade 3 leaks above a certain size less leaks will be found to fix,and threshold(TBD)are repaired on an less leaks will have to be monitored within "Potential increase in capital for one accelerated timeline, Ye ar repairs and expense for labor. from discovery,meaning the utilities have one year from when they detect a Grade 2 or above ground Grade 3 leak Note:Extended time is allowed for to fix it. This would apply to all leaks those leaks which cannot be fixed on found after December 15,2016. time due to permitting problems or other problems beyond the utility's Note:In no case shall the time to repair control. a leak exceed the repair times specified in G.O.112 F and succeeding revisions, or as ordered by the CPUC Gas Safety and Reliability Branch. Backlogs—Utilities will be allowed until October 1,2018 to eliminate their backlog of above ground Grade 3 leaks found prior to December 15,2016. Note: Grading terminology varies between utilities. Grade can also be referred to as Code. Some utilities may also have Grade 2+leaks. Grade 24 leaks shall be repaired within the same time limit as Grade 2 leaks unless required by the CFRs,G.O.112F,or the CPUC Gas Safety and Reliability Branch to be repaired sooner. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 19 of 22 Mandatory Method 1 Logic Deadline Category Leak Prevention Revise pipe fitting specifications to Design This is being added as a mandatory February 28,2017 require tighter tolerance/better quality practice because of the very large pipe threads. number of threaded fittings and their known propensity to develop leaks. This is being recommended as a mandatory BP,provided that further research proves this to be a cost- effective. If so,utilities will not be required to replace all threaded connections immediately,but rather replace them as incidental work is required to be performed on them. This particular practice will be to use ANPT pipe threads instead of NPT. However,other types of threads or connections may prove better. Leaks from threaded connections are usually not a result of initial installation. Leaks are usually a result of what happens later (corrosion,things bumping into the MSAs,customer abuse,etc.). Most likely this practice will result in an incremental reduction of emissions. Methods,systems and components Design, Storage facilities contain large February 28,2017 used to prevent and/or stop the Process and volumes of methane. An uncontrolled flow of methane from a Program uncontrolled release will negate the gas system or storage facility. Development methane reductions of other utilities, &Training,IM increase greenhouse gases and This requirement should not be Crossover endanger public health by releasing duplicative to the DOGGR's or CARB's large amounts of odorant and other Oil&Gas Regulations. toxic natural gas by-products. Dig-Ins-Public education program to Existing Dig-Ins are the major cause of gas Now. alert the public and contractors to the Practice, line ruptures. Call Before You Dig-811 program. In Process and addition,utilities must provide Program procedures for contractors to follow Development when excavating to prevent damaging &Training or rupturing a gas line. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities-R.1S-01-008 Page 20 of 22 Dig-Ins-Utilities must provide ] Monitoring, This is necessary to ensure that Now company monitors to witness all Existing people excavating around the line do excavations near gas transmission lines Practice not damage it or rupture it. It is to ensure that contractors are following possible to have an excavator nick or utility procedures to properly excavate damage a transmission line causing it and backfill around transmission lines. to rupture years later. Dig-In Repeat Of fenders-Contractors Regulatory Repeat offenders of the 811 laws are Now found to be at fault more than once by common. This must not be tolerated. a CPUC investigation,for rupturing a gas line,must be labelled Repeat Offenders.They must be forbidden from excavating near gas lines in the future. In addition,the utility must be report them to the California Contractor's State License Board. The Board has the authority to investigate and punish dishonest or negligent contractors. Punishment can include sus ension of their contractor's license. Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities- R.15-01-008 Page 21 of 22 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A -Best Practices Consolidated Spreadsheet The Excel spreadsheet in Attachment A, found on the Risk Assessment website at http:/Is ww.cpuc.ca.gov/riskassessment/ is the work product from the Best Practices Working Group. All spreadsheets submitted by the parties have been merged together (consolidated) and notes from all of the meetings have been added in Red into the column titled "Additional Comments from Meeting.' PG&E participants agreed to categorize the BPs for us, using the categories found in Method 1 and Method 2. The spreadsheet that they developed was circulated by PG&E to the Service List. The staff of the CPUC prefers Method 1; however parties are free to use whatever method they choose to help them organize and categorize BPs for their purposes. The staff of the CPUC modified Method 1 slightly. We have added two categories to the Method 1 list. The categories are "Design" and "Regulatory Issue." The category "Design" is needed because some BPs require design changes to gas system infrastructure. In addition, the staff of the CPUC has color-coded, in light green, BPs which are also recommended by the EPA Gas Star Program and added the list of BPs meeting topics, in the yellow box, in the upper right-hand corner of the spreadsheet. -END- Summary of Best Practices Working Group Activities-R.15-01-008 Page 22 of 22