►
From YouTube: NTSB Public Meeting Day 2 Disc 2 of 3 March 2, 2011
Description
NTSB Public Meeting Day 2 March 2, 2011
Disc 2 of 3
Natural Gas Pipeline Explosion and Fire
San Bruno, CA September 9, 2010
A
B
B
C
C
C
B
B
B
C
D
Thank
you,
I'm
paul,
klan
and
I'll
be
representing
the
public
utilities.
Commission
a
couple
of
questions
for
chief
haig
chief.
You
were
there
the
night
of
the
night
of
the
incident.
You
arrived
just
a
few
minutes
after
the
explosion
and
took
command
at
the
at
the
incident
command
center.
Is
that
right,
correct?
So,
and
you
were
there
over
the
course
of
the
evening,
and
you
saw
and
in
fact
you
ordered
many
of
the
events
that
happened
correct.
What
was
it
like.
C
Obviously
you
know
san
mateo
county
has
in
the
state
of
california,
uses
their
mutual
aid
system,
probably
as
frequent
as
anyone,
but
in
our
county
we
have
drop
boundaries.
In
our
response
plan
we
have
a
central
dispatch
for
fire,
so
ordering
up
resources.
I
think
we
had
over
68
firefighters
on
scene
within
22
minutes,
so
the
response
from
both
law
fire
public
services
was
probably
the
most
amazing
thing.
I've
seen.
D
D
Had
you
known
that
there
was
a
that
there
was
a
gas
pipeline
there
or
had
your
dispatchers
known
and
your
and
your
immediate
first
responders
what
would
have
been
different?
The
way
I
understand
is
that
some
of
the
early
reports
were
that
people
believe
that
there
had
been
a
plane
crash.
For
example,
had
you
known,
or
had
your
dispatchers
known
in
advance
that
there
was
a
gas
transmission
line
through
there?
What
might
have
gone
down
differently.
C
The
initial
report
on
the
incident
was
a
plane
down
and
that
those
reports
continued
for
the
first
45
minutes.
You
know,
with
the
airport
being
as
close
as
it
is
to
this
site.
You
know
initial,
we
we
thought
that
that
was
a
possibility.
Obviously
our
response
to
the
incident
would
not
have
changed
whether
it
was
an
airline
or
down
or
the
explosion
itself
I
mean
our
tactical
dispatch
and
strategy
would
be
the
same,
fighting
what
we
saw
and
then
we're
trying
to
adapt
and
control.
I
mean
that's
the
same
mission.
D
D
Had
the
gas
been
able
to
be
shut
off
earlier,
so
we
heard
yesterday
that
there
was
that
there
was
a
period
of
about
an
hour
or
so
that
it
took
about
an
hour
or
so
longer
to
cut
off
the
gas
that
was
coming
in
through
both
directions
to
the
ruptured
pipe
in
san
bruno
on
september
9th
then
it
might
have
had
there
been
remote-controlled
valves,
for
example,
so,
roughly
an
hour
so
and
not
to
hold
you
to
that
number.
What
I'm
curious
to
know
is
what
the
impact
of
that
hour
was.
D
D
D
Let
me
ask
the
question
chair
and
then,
and
then
yeah.
Please
do
tell
me
if
it's
off
topic,
my
basic
question
is
in
terms
of
public
awareness,
since
the
fire
department
didn't
know
about
the
vows
and
didn't
know
and
didn't
have
the
capability
of
closing
the
valves.
What
impact
that
had
and
and
whether
advanced
knowledge
might
have
changed
the
situation
on
the
ground
that
night
and
I'm
perfectly
happy
to
take
that
offline.
If
that's
not
appropriate
here,.
A
C
Again,
we've
been
instructed
by
madam
chair
not
to
speculate
and
and
in
honest
my
honest
opinion
I
would
be
speculating.
Obviously
we
had
an
initial
explosion
without
the
fuel
supply
there's
a
possibility.
We
could
then
instead
of
a
defensive
mode
and
offensive
mode,
but
I
couldn't
tell
you
what
impact
that
would
have
so.
B
A
Okay,
just
so
the
parties
and
the
witnesses
are
clear,
it's
so
it's
perfectly
fine
to
ask
questions
that
are
factual
in
nature.
The
witnesses
are
experts
and
there's
certain
areas,
and
that's
why
they're
here,
and
so
we
do
want
to
ask
questions
where
your
qualifications
can
actually
shed
light
on
them.
A
F
Great
thank
you
very
much.
I
have
a
question
for
chief
hague,
first
of
all
like
to
applaud
the
efforts
of
you
and
the
rest
of
your
team
out
there
and
helping
protect
the
community,
but
would
like
to
just
solicit
your
ideas
on
how
can
we
collectively,
whether
it
be
emerging?
Sorry,
the
emergency
response
community
represented
by
mr
narva
and
others,
or
whether
it's
the
industry
or
the
regulators,
get
the
attention
of
local
officials,
including
emergency,
responders,
prior
to
a
failure?
F
We
will
see
a
lot
of
efforts
that
will
be
going
out,
but,
as
a
couple
of
people
have
said,
that
communication
has
to
go
two
ways:
it's
not
meant
by
any
means.
As
a
criticism,
I
know
you
have
your
hands
full
on
a
daily
basis,
and
if
you
don't
have
a
history
of
failures,
how
do
we
get
your
attention
prior
to
a
failure?
Welcome
any
ideas.
C
Well,
if
the
awareness
isn't
any
higher
right
now,
I'd
be
very
disappointed
and
on
the
fire
side,
so
I
think
the
opportunity
to
jump
on
that
awareness
opportunity,
I'm
sure
the
fire
service
and
would
collaborate.
Hopefully
you
know
in
much
greater
effort
than
than
have
been,
but
I
meant
put
it
that
way.
F
My
my
next
question,
then
hopefully
leading
off
to
that,
would
be
to
mr
narva
and
I'd
just
like
to
ask
mr
narva:
have
you
gotten
much
feedback
or
recognition
for
the
pipeline
emergencies
program
and
again,
maybe
just
to
connect
to
the
chiefs
thoughts,
your
ideas
on
how
we
can
get
the
information?
That's
already
been
developed
more
rapidly
into
the
hands
of
emergency
responders.
D
Sure
the
pipeline
emergencies,
as
I
mentioned
in
the
earlier
session,
is
a
program.
That's
been
around
for
about
seven
years.
It's
continually
evolving.
We
are
now
just
finishing
up.
The
second
edition,
and
part
of
that
second
edition
is
to
make
it
electronic.
I
alluded
to
that
briefly,
I'm
going
to
deploy
it
in
an
electronic
portal,
so
that
is
available
to
any
emergency
responder
at
their
convenience
their
time
and
also
do
it
in
a
way.
That's
that's,
measurable
and
trackable,
so
that
we
know
how
far
they've
done
in
the
curriculum
we
can
measure
learning.
F
Us
a
long
way,
I
think
great.
Thank
you
very
much.
I
think
I
still
have
a
couple
of
minutes.
I
I'll
open
it
up
to
anyone's
comments
on
this
one,
but
it's
having
myself
been
involved
in
public
awareness
for
a
number
of
years.
One
of
the
things
we're
constantly
struggling
with
is
the
difference
between
awareness
and
behavioral
change.
F
You
know,
awareness
is
the
first
step.
You
know,
and
I
just
welcome
any
thoughts.
You
know,
and
carl
we've
had
this
conversation
ourselves
about.
How
do
you
once
you
gain
awareness?
How
do
you
get
people
to
change?
Behavior
811
is
a
perfect
example.
People
know
you
need
to
call
before
you
dig.
They
will
be
aware
of
it
and
still
not
do
it
by
just
anyone
who
wants
to
swing
it.
That
way.
E
G
H
G
The
key
to
building
upon
awareness
to
actually
get
to
actual
behavior
change,
really
results
from
really
drilling
down
and
looking
at
the
incentives
and
barriers
for
people
to
make
those
types
of
behavior
changes
and
addressing
those
and
and
that's
something
that
I
think
that
that
we
all
need
to
work
on
harder.
Some
of
it
even
goes
to
the
previous
question
about
just
who's
doing
the
communication.
G
B
Yes,
thank
you.
My
questions
are
directed
to
mr
resendez.
Earlier
this
morning,
during
the
technical
panel
discussion,
you
had
started
to
discuss
what
is
covered
at
the
public
liaison
meeting
and
the
responding
to
gas
and
electric
emergency
seminars
that
pg
puts
on
you
care
to
complete
your
thoughts.
I
Sure,
let
me
just
make
sure
this
is
in
the
right
place.
Yeah,
the
public
liaison
meeting
is
intended
to
increase
partnership
and
coordination
among
the
local
group
and
the
local
emergency
response
community,
whether
that
be
the
fire
police
chiefs
or
the
office
of
emergency
services
located
in
that
local
area.
I
The
kinds
of
things
that
they
cover
are
reviewing
and
looking
upon
those
various
incidents
which
have
occurred
to
understand
what
might
have
been
learned
as
well
as
go
over
various
aspects
of
gas
and
electric
infrastructure
is,
it
is
high
tech,
if
you
may
at
its
basis
and
is
very
complicated,
and
there
is
certainly
a
level
of
understanding
that
we
want
to
convey
around
that
infrastructure.
But
I
think,
most
importantly,
is
the
communication,
the
two
person
communication
that
occurs
as
well
as
providing
them
contact
information.
I
In
general,
we've
had
22
classes
so
far
across
our
service
territory.
We've
had
in
excess
of
700
attendees
police,
fire,
911,
dispatchers,
homeland
security
safety
professionals.
We've
had
other
operators
come
to
these,
as
well
as
public
works
departments.
Feedback
has
been
extremely
positive.
What
we
cover
are
you
know
the
foundational
issues.
I
What
does
the
infrastructure
look
like
both
gas
and
electric?
What
kind
of
hazards
might
be
encountered
step
and
touch
potential?
Why
pinching
off
the
line
or
stopping
the
flow
of
gas
could
be
a
potential
issue?
We
talk
about
transmission
level
issues,
we
actually
hand
a
handout
out.
That
includes
the
evacuation
distances
for
various
pipe
sizes
and
pressures,
and
then
in
follow-up.
We
even
provide
them
all
of
the
resources
that
were
used
to
build
the
class.
B
I
Sure
I
also
mentioned
that
we
had
had
a
lot
of
meetings
with
public
officials.
I
I'd
like
to
call
up
a
slide,
exhibit
for
why
and
why
that's
going
up
just
a
couple
of
comments.
It
was
mentioned
a
little
bit
earlier.
The
national
pipeline
mapping
system
has
been
usually
the
go-to
point
in
a
variety
of
communications,
whether
it
be
the
affected
public,
public
officials
or
emergency
responders.
I
What
we
did
is
actually
incorporated
a
map
within
our
website
that
allows
the
user
to
type
in
any
address,
whether
it
be
their
home,
their
business
or
a
family
member.
What
you're
seeing
right
now
is
actually
a
localized
map,
that's
available
through
their
my
account
feature.
That
being
you
know,
the
feature
you
go
in
and
log
into
to
pay
your
bill
manage
your
energy,
but
it
also
includes
a
map
just
like
this
one.
It
gives
about
a
two
mile
radius
around
the
home,
so
it
actually
gets
down
to
the
street
level.
I
J
I
K
I
believe
the
information
that
is
there
is
is
adequate,
especially
when
it's
coupled
with
the
other
information
that
is
available
by
by
working
directly
with
the
pipeline
operators.
We
are
continually
working
on
our
npms
and
revising
it
and
issuing
upgrades
to
it.
So,
yes,
I
believe
it
is
adequate,
especially
if
you
couple
it
with
the
other
outreach
efforts.
J
K
K
Originally,
when
the
pipeline
operators
first
completed
their
public
awareness,
written
programs,
there
was
a
clearinghouse
and
those
the
clearinghouse
reviewed
all
of
the
requirements
that
are
in
1162
to
see
how
the
written
programs
aligned
the
feedback
from
that
clearinghouse
review
was
sent
to
the
california
public
utilities,
commission
and
any
additional
inspection
activity
that
would
have
occurred
between
that
time
and
now
would
have
been
done
by
the
california
public
utilities.
Commission.
B
B
There
we
go
because
pg
e
does
participate
in
our
papers
program.
They
were
part
of
the
surveys
done
in
that
region
and
that
information
would
have
been
presented
back
to
them
as
part
of
their
part
of
their
records
for
their
program.
We
would
not,
we
would
not
have
looked
at
the
individual
data,
we
would
look
at.
We
would
look
at
aggregate
data
for
the
industry.
B
One
of
the
functions
of
the
trade
association
is
share.
Information
among
members
be
their
regulatory
efforts
or
workshops,
so
there
would
be
an
informal
feedback
mechanism
as
lessons
learned
from
individual
companies
back
and
forth,
depending
on
the
trade
organizationally
belong
to
and
in
some
cases
we'll
invite
outside
parties
to
help.
In
those
discussions.
G
Yes,
and
just
quickly,
we
haven't
done
any
specific
evaluation.
Those
public
awareness
programs
are
not
available
to
groups
like
ourselves
or
to
the
public,
so
it
would
be
hard
to
evaluate
them,
although
I
think
the
ultimate
evaluation
is
what
we
heard
after
the
san
bruno
tragedy
that
people
had
no
idea.
J
Thank
you,
mr
narva.
You
mentioned
earlier
that
more
pre-event
communication
is
desirable
and
I'm
wondering
if
you
could
expand
a
little
bit
about
how
you
believe
pipeline
operators
can
improve
their
public
awareness
programs,
particularly
as
it
relates
to
information
available
to
local
emergency
responders
about
the
location,
operating
characteristics
and
hazards
posed
by
pipelines
in
their
communities.
D
We
in
past
years
have
focused
on
a
state
by
state
approach
of
bringing
together
the
emergency
responders,
pipeline
operators,
state
and
federal
regulators,
all
of
the
stakeholders,
so
to
speak
and
trying
to
facilitate
those
communications
and
understanding
what
one
another
does,
what
their
role
is
and
what
resources
they
have.
That's
something
that
we
need
to
replicate
far
more
frequently
and
on
a
state-by-state
approach
as
well
as
at
the
local
level.
You
just
can't
replace
that
face-to-face
communication
and
understanding
what
the
other
party
has
how
they
can
help.
J
If,
if
I
might
just
take
a
another
couple
of
seconds
for
a
question
to
chief
haig,
a
two-part
question
first,
if
you
could
clarify
the
situation
that
was
raised
earlier
regarding
the
dry
hydrants,
I
believe
was
the
word
and
then.
Secondly,
I
am
sure
that
even
in
your
30-year
career
with
the
fire
service
that
you
might
not
have
imagined
being
before
the
ntsb
in
a
proceeding
such
as
we
are
here
today.
J
C
My
belief
is:
there's
players
in
this
room
that
can
has
the
ability
to
see
that
something
like
this
doesn't
occur
again,
whether
it's
through
legislation,
regulatory
training,
safety
measures,
technology,
so
that
this
does
no
other
community
has
to
suffer
the
consequences
that
we
did
in
san
bruno.
Thank
you.
L
L
The
only
other
pipeline
accident
that
I've
been
involved
with
was
one
in
carmichael,
mississippi
about
two
and
a
half
actually
about
three
and
a
half
years
ago,
and
I
was
on
scene
there
and
then,
of
course
it
came
to
the
board
about
a
year
later.
I
noticed
there-
and
I
just
went
through
the
report
this
morning
that
in
that
particular
case
in
carmichael
mississippi,
which
is
really
in
an
extremely
rural
community.
We
had
difficulty
even
finding
the
place.
L
The
one
of
the
callers
to
911
immediately
knew
that
it
was
a
gas
explosion.
So
here's
a
very
rural
community
where
the
residents
knew
that
it
was
a
pipeline
explosion.
They
knew
there
was
a
pipeline
going
through
the
community.
The
sheriff
immediately
knew
that
there
was
a
pipeline.
He
even
knew
that
it
was
a
liquid
propane
pipeline
going
through
the
area,
as
did
the
assistant
chief
of
the
county,
volunteer
fire
department.
L
So,
chief
this,
this
question
will
be
directed
to
you.
I
noticed
that
mr
narva
said
that
pipeline
information
was
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
fire
departments
on
the
pipeline
disasters,
but
of
course
he
represents
the
national
association
of
state
fire
marshals.
I
I
suspect
that
you
interact.
Do
you
interact
with
that
organization,
or
do
you
more
interact
with
the
national
association
of
fire
chiefs
or
both.
C
Our
immediate
vision
is
the
california
state
fire
marshal's
office
in
california.
The
cpuc
has
a
regulatory
on
gas
line
transmission.
Our
state
fire
office
typically
deals
with
liquid
transmission
lines,
but
I
think,
as
you
indicated
I
I
I
said
earlier-
I
I
have
been
on
the
national
association
state
fire
marshal's
website
and
actually
have
downloaded
some
of
the
scenarios
and
programs.
I.
L
C
L
L
L
D
L
G
Well,
I
think
it's
a
shared
responsibility
and
you
can't
really
expect
people
to
go
out
and
look
for
something
if
they
don't
know
it's
there.
So
I
think
the
industry
has
a
real
responsibility
to
try
to
to
get
that
information
into
people's
hands,
but
it's
certainly
a
shared
responsibility
on
everybody's
part.
I
think,
as
the
locations
become
known
and
as
the
emergency
response
plans
get
shared
with
fire
departments
in
local
emergency
planning
committees,
that
type
of
information
will
flow
out
from
both
ways.
L
Thank
you.
It's
a
shared
responsibility.
So
when
I
was
on
a
on
an
airport
commission
years
ago,
we
we
talked
about
people
that
would
complain
about
airport
noise
and
we
said
well.
They
should
be
aware
what
they're
getting
when
they
buy
the
buy
the
property.
I
don't
think
that
ever
went
anywhere
with
the
real
with
the
state
legislature,
but
I'm
wondering
has
there
ever
been
any
thought
to
to
a
disclosure
on
a
on
a
real
estate
contract
or
something
to
to
make
people
make
people
aware?
L
I
don't
know
I
do
not
know
if
there's
a
pipeline
going
through
my
neighborhood.
I
don't
know
that.
That's
my
own,
my
own
lack
of
information
there
I
do
know
there's
a
railroad
track
going
there
because
I
can
see
it
but
but
have
you?
Has
there
ever
been
any
thought
to
disclosing
information
like
this
on
a
real
estate
contract.
G
There
certainly
has
been
thought
to
that
and
the
pipeline's,
an
informed
planning
alliance
report
that
just
came
out
a
little
over
a
month
ago
has
a
recommendation
in
there
to
move
forward
with
from
state
to
state,
because
I
think
it
has
to
be
a
state
by
state
thing
to
to
put
that
type
of
disclosure.
So
at
least
people
that
are
buying
property
in
proximity
to
pipelines
would
have
that
awareness
when
they
purchase.
L
I
N
The
two
of
you
are
representing
all
the
first
responders
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
get
a
chance
to
acknowledge
and
thank
you
for
your
response
on
september
9th
it's
after
these
tragedies
that
we're
always
reminded
that
there
are
people
that
run
toward
them
on
our
behalf.
So
we
thank
you
for
that.
N
N
N
N
So
I'm
sure
all
of
you
are
familiar
that
before
the
meeting
started.
Those
exits
were
on
the
screens
up
here
and
then
the
chairman
gave
you
specific
directions,
so
you
could
point
to
multiple
ones.
The
challenge
is
to
have
the
knowledge.
You
all
seem
to
pass
that
the
next
is,
do
we
know
the
action
walk,
don't
run.
N
Is
there
any
program
or
activity
that
has
been
demonstrated
to
actually
address
knowledge
and
appropriate
action,
and
you
get
extra
credit
if
anyone's
actually
shown
that
that
translates
into
people
knowing
what
they're
doing
on
the
public
side?
That
means
I
smell
gas.
Do
I
know
where
to
call
I'm
excavating?
Do
I
know
what
to
do
about
that?
First
responders,
where's,
that
information
coming
from
what
do
I
do
it's
knowledge
and
it's
appropriate
action.
B
G
Yes
in
washington
state
because
of
the
pipelines
and
foreign
planning
alliance
document
that
recently
came
out,
we've
had
an
effort
for
the
past
year
in
washington
state
to
try
to
engage
local
public
officials
about
planning
your
pipelines
and
through
some
of
those
very
targeted
efforts.
We've
got,
I
think,
for
jurisdictions
now
that
have
passed
ordinances
that
use
their
zoning
and
permitting
processes
to
help
people
stay
safer,
near
pipelines
and
a
couple
other
jurisdictions
that
are
moving
that
direction.
K
I
think,
with,
I
think,
with
respect
to
damage
prevention.
It's
a
little
bit
easier
to
measure
because
we
could
measure
calls
to
811
after
a
campaign.
In
many
cases
we
could
we
could
measure
damages
per
thousand
locate
tickets,
it's
more
difficult
to
measure
behavior
after
an
event
what
to
do
if
you
smell
gas,
but
I
do
know
of
some
operator
programs
who
have
campaigns
where
they,
they
measure
understanding
and
intended
behavior.
If,
if
a
customer
would
smell
gas,
then
they
run
the
campaign
and
take
the
same
measurement.
N
So
just
because
we
don't
know
something's
there
after
tragedy,
it's
easy
for
all
of
us
to
say
we
should
have
paid
attention.
So
I
think
we
really
need
to
focus
on
the
knowledge
and
do
they
have
the
action.
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
examples
with
responses
in
san
francisco
airport.
You
do
this
all
the
time.
N
Let's
see
if
people
really
do
walk
or
run,
we
can
measure
that
kind
of
stuff,
but
that
really
has
to
be
where
the
focus
is-
and
I
just
want
to
raise
a
concern
that,
if
we're
just
focusing
on
the
mailing
and
did
they
get
it
or
not,
and
did
they
read
it,
etc.
What
we
really
want
to
know
is:
do
they
have
the
right
knowledge
that
do
they
have
the
knowledge
to
take
the
right
action?
N
Whether
they
do
that
or
not
is
another
thing,
but
we
got
to
make
sure
that's
the
part
that's
getting
trained,
so
I
think
there's
almost
a
misnomer
about
awareness,
because
we're
all
aware
it's
not
good,
and
the
final
comment
I
would
just
make
is
this
is
hard
to
do
but
they're
models.
You
know
we
work
in
transportation,
safety
work
on
getting
people
to
click,
it
fasten
their
seat
belt,
not
drink
and
drive,
and
prevention's
even
harder
right.
N
So
there
are
models,
though,
on.
I
think
that
this
industry
could
take
from
other
places
to
make
sure
that
you're,
at
least
using
the
most
effective
mechanisms
possible
to
get
the
best
outcomes
that
you
want,
because
we
don't
want
these
tragedies
and
then
just
wondering
whether
people
got
the
mailing
or
not.
We
want
to
know
that
the
first
responders
in
public
have
the
information
they
needed
to
take
the
right
action.
Thank
you.
B
Thank
you.
I
would
like
to
second
remember,
rose
kind,
and
certainly
what
the
chairman
has
already
said
about
the
amazing
response
of
the
first
responders.
I
was
there
on
the
scene,
and
so
I
witnessed
it
and
I
heard
the
story
of
the
truck
turning
the
corner
and
the
heat
cracked,
the
windshield.
I
mean
that
in
itself
tells
what
kind
of
environment
these
people
were
subjected
to
and
they
did
an
amazing
job.
So
I
would
like
to.
I
would
like
to
second
that
what
the
member
rose
kind
and
the
chairman
have
said.
B
My
question
relates
to
1162
and
excuse
me
if
I
missed
this
in
the
course
the
proceedings,
but
it's
not
clear
to
me.
Maybe
it
should
be
addressed
to
mr
lydiac
for
api
and
ms
robertson
from
fimsa,
but
it's
not
clear
to
me
whether
this
is
a
recommended
practice
from
api
or
whether
it
also
had
whether
it's
also
a
requirement
that
was
made
a
requirement
by
feminism.
So
what?
What
is
the?
What
is
the
status
of
1162
in
the
industry?.
A
C
C
C
C
C
And
this
is
this
scenario
like
I
guess,
I'm
a
having
a
little
hard
understanding
is,
is
the
size
of
the
explosion
and
the
ensuing
ball
of
fuel
was
pretty
much
establish
its
own
perimeter
and
and
from
the
heat
we
could
access
only
so
close
to
any
point
in
that
perimeter,
so
that
was
essentially
our
limitations
of
gaining
access.
There.
C
C
A
C
C
C
A
Okay,
mr
jones,
can
you
please
pull
up,
exhibit
4a
I'd
like
to
follow
up
on
mr
traynor's
question
to
mr
resendez
having
to
do
with
public
awareness
and
rp
1162
establishes
guidance
for
operators
to
develop,
manage
and
evaluate
public
awareness
programs,
and
mr
traynor
asked
you
a
question
about
evaluating
the
effectiveness
of
your
public
awareness
programs,
and
I
understand
that
you
contract
out
the
evaluation
portion
of
that
there
was
a
little
bit
of
a
discussion
about
the
response
rate
and
that
they
had
mathematical
models.
Do
you
remember
that
I.
D
I
I
I
do
you
know
again
we're
participating
in
the
api
sponsored
paper
survey,
which
is
the
public
awareness
program,
effectiveness,
research
survey.
We
participated
it
in
2007.
Now,
I'm
again,
I'm
not
a
statistician,
but
it's
it's.
My
understanding
that
that
particular
survey
is
executed
was
designed
to
get
a
representative
sample
such
that
you'd
be
able
to
scale
that
to
that
population.
A
A
And
it
right
here
at
the
bottom,
it
talks
about
your
effectiveness,
review
paradigm
alliance
conducted
a
program
effectiveness
review
in
june
2010
they
mailed
public
awareness
brochures
with
business.
Reply,
mail
survey
postcards
to
over
15
000
addresses
eight
weeks
later,
20
survey
postcards
were
returned,
so
if
you
could
go
to
the
next
page,
please,
mr
jones,
and
here's
a
summary
of
some
of
the
responses
that
they
received
on
your
behalf,
and
these
were
all
mailed
to
people
who
actually
are
located
near
a
pipeline,
and
so
do
you
or
someone.
A
You
know
work
or
live
near
a
pipeline.
More
people
said
no
than
said.
Yes,
have
you
seen
information
about
pipeline
safety
within
the
last
two
years
and
earlier
in
the
document
we
talk
about
all
of
the
mailings
that
are
done
twice
a
year
through
the
through
the
bills
and
things
like
that.
14
of
them
said
no
that
they
had
not
seen
information
and
only
three
had
the
great
news
is
everyone
would
call
9-1-1
and
unfortunately
I
I
think
this
it
kind
of
shows
what
we
have
problems
with
excavation.
A
I
And
you're
right,
madam
chairman,
I
I
will
not
disagree
that
there
was
a
real
learning
opportunity
and
the
responses
that
we
received,
I
think
what's
what's
important.
Here,
is
what
was
mentioned
a
little
bit
earlier,
that
one
of
the
things
that
utilities
are
encouraged
to
do
is
to
actually
develop
materials
that
are
compelling
and
informative,
and
that
have
a
tone
and
a
language
for
which
the
audience
speaks,
as
opposed
to
utility
speak
and
in
those
responses,
and
just
so
we're
clear
as
to
what
we
did
the
business
reply
card
that
was
used.
I
There
was
to
test
the
actual
content,
non-effectiveness
surveys
such
as
the
paper
survey,
but
an
effectiveness
survey,
if
you
may
of
the
actual
effectiveness
of
just
that
individual
piece
and
getting
20
responses
when
you
have
15,
000
recipients
was
unacceptable
to
us
and
it
caused
us
to
step
back
and
really
ask
the
question.
You
know
what
are
we
doing
wrong
with
respect
to
notifying
and
informing
and
raising
awareness?
I
Clearly,
the
language
needs
to
change,
and
so
we
will
be
engaging
our
corporate
communications
group,
who
has
particular
expertise
in
these
kinds
of
areas
to
completely
reformulate.
If
you
may
the
information
in
there-
and
I
think
too,
when
you
look
at
the
business
reply
card-
and
this
is
kind
of
an
industry
technique-
is
you
know
what
are
you
really
offering
in
return?
One
of
the
things
that
I
think
we
really
missed
in
that
particular
piece?
Was
we
didn't
give
the
customer
some
benefit
of
letting
us
know
that
information?
I
We
said
their
opinion
was
important,
but
maybe
they
had
additional
questions.
Maybe
they
wanted
to
get
additional
information
so
we're
looking
at
opportunities
to
improve,
if
you
may,
the
techniques
that
we
use
to
be
able
to
kind
of
entice
and-
and
that
was
mentioned
a
little
bit
earlier
or
prompt
that
kind
of
responds.
A
D
D
And
the
reason
I
ask
this
and
I'll
just
ask
you
if
you
want
to
expand
on
that
answer.
Is
that
particularly
since
the
san
bruno
accident?
Of
course,
people
in
northern
california
are
concerned
not
now
just
not
about
whether
a
transmission
line
comes
through
their
neighborhood,
but
whether
it
might
be
an
old
one
or
one
that
is
similar
to
the
one
that
ruptured
so
so
pg
e
would
feel
comfortable,
providing
local
people
with
specific
information
about
the
pipelines.
I
Yeah,
in
fact,
we
have
a
888
number
that
was
set
up
because
we
were
receiving
a
lot
of
inquiries.
Customers
wanted
to
know
and-
and
we
wanted
to
provide
information,
and
so
we
set
up
an
888
number.
We
received
thousands
of
calls
on
that
individual
line
and
for
those
more
complicated
questions,
maybe
kind
of
the
ones
that
you're
inferring
those
actually
go
through
a
process
whereby
experts,
if
you
may,
who
have
particular
specialty
in
in
the
ability
of
being
able
to
get
those
answers,
we'll
send
in
writing
to
those
customers.
F
K
They
have
a
responsibility
to
reach
out
to
the
emergency
responders,
to
explain.
You
know
that
the
pipeline
is
in
the
area
the
characteristics
of
release,
how
to
respond,
how
to
get
more
information
to
have
contact
information
recently,
I
believe
it
was.
In
november
of
2010
we
issued
an
advisory
bulletin,
reminding
operators
of
their
responsibility,
their
liaison
responsibilities
for
emergency
responders.
F
Great,
thank
you
very
much
chief
and
just
want
to
make
a
forgive
me
minor
rhetorical
comment.
It
was
in
part.
You
know
we
all
look
to
learn
from
tragedies
like
san
bruno,
our
administrator
following
that
directed
us
to
reinforce
the
message
with
the
industry
that
they
have
a
positive
requirement
to
maintain
liaison
with
emergency
responders.
I
think
we
all
believe
that's
crucial,
just
a
real,
quick
question,
because
I
think
it
needs
to
be
in
the
dialogue
as
we
talk
about
maps.
I
don't
know.
F
G
F
Well,
thank
you.
We
think
it's
a
crucial
tool
too.
What
I
was
trying
to
get
to
was
there
are
security
considerations,
so
the
compromise
that
was
reached
after
three
years
of
negotiation
with
homeland
security
and
everyone
was
to
get
it
at
a
county
level
or
lower
and
not
to
allow
people
to
zoom
in
and
out
that
could
be
used
for
other
purposes.
I
know
there
are
a
million
opinions
on
that.
I
just
wanted
to
get
it
on
the
record
and
then,
lastly,
for
miss
robertson
during
your
inspections
of
public
awareness.
F
Obviously,
effectiveness
is
what
everyone's
after
it
was
really
part
of
the
original
recommendation
from
the
ntsb,
as
you
noted,
from
lively,
and
I
think
also
an
accident
well
in
carmichael,
but
in
in
kansas
as
well,
and
they
asked
us
and
we
built
that
into
that
standard
which
is
now
incorporated.
But
how
do
we
look
to
see
if
a
company
is
actually.
K
Learning
what
the
inspection
process
is
all
about,
what
we
want
to
find
out
when
we
go
out
and
meet
with
these
operators
and
conduct
our
inspections
is
number
one.
What
does
their
program
say?
Is
it
aligned
with
1162
number
two?
Do
they
implement
it
in
accordance
with
what
they've
written,
what
they
said,
they're
going
to
do?
K
Have
they
taken
the
measurements
that
are
required?
How
did
they
go
about
each
of
the
different
audiences
in
each
of
the
messages?
How
did
they
measure
it?
What
was
their
methodology
and
what
did
they
learn
from
it?
You
know
you
can
have
the
measurements,
but
you
need
to
evaluate
it.
What
have
you
learned
from
it
and
what
have
you
done
or
what
are
you
planning
to
do
to
make
changes
to
your
program?
K
Public
awareness
is
a
continual
improvement
type
regulation.
There's
a
12-step
process
within
the
regulation
that
outlines
off
to
operators
what
they
should
do
to
improve
their
programs
and,
as
we
continue
to
do
these
inspections,
we'll
learn,
what's
working,
what's
not
working
with
respect
to
the
regulation
and
the
standard,
and
we
can
make
changes
accordingly.
F
Great,
thank
you
just
rhetorically
exiting
I'll,
say
if
I
had
a
response
rate,
as
you
did
in
pg
e,
mr
resendez
I'd
be
thinking
about
whether
that
tool
was
effective.
You
know,
or
maybe
there's
another
way
of
implementing
that
tool
to
see
whether
that's
effective,
but
clearly
that
sort
of
a
response
rate
is
not
helping.
B
I
N
J
K
K
What
from
mileage
to
enforcement
actions,
we
have
a
wealth
of
information
about
damage
prevention,
public
awareness
of
the
piper
program
that
just
came
out.
So,
although
there
may
not
be
more
definitive
information
about
the
location
of
the
pipelines,
there
is
a
lot
of
information
about
the
pipeline
safety
program
available
on
our
website.
K
I
The
the
map
that's
located
within
the
my
account
function,
I
believe,
is
it
at
a
much
closer
view
and
gives
a
two-mile
radius.
Also
pg
e
is
participating
in
a
new
program
that
was
developed
by
the
pipeline
association
for
public
awareness.
It's
an
online
module
that
allows
people
to
identify
pipes
near
them.
I
I
think,
what's
really
we're
trying
to
take
advantage
of
technology,
so
it'll
also
have
kind
of
an
iphone
or
a
google
based
phone
application
that
will
allow
you
to
access
that
through
your
browser
and
be
able
to
find
major
pipelines
that
are
located
near
you
will
tell
you
the
direction
the
distance.
It
will
tell
you
what
product
is
inside
the
various
hazards
associated
with
that
response
needs
if
there's
a
leak
and
contact
information
for
the
operator.
So
we
are
looking
at
additional
opportunities
to
be
able
to
meet
that
need.
A
A
N
O
C
B
L
B
For
facilitating
the
investigation
as
well
as
they
did
for
preserving
the
site
for
accompanying
us,
wherever
we
had
to
go
to
to
do
the
what
we
needed
to
do
as
investigators
for
feeding
us
for
providing
us
places
to
me
for
facilitating
the
media
interviews,
all
the
things
that
you
did
to
help
this
investigation
go
as
well
as
it
did.
I
want
to
thank
all
of
you
and
congratulate
you
for
a
job
well
done.
A
You
know
yesterday
we
had
an
opportunity
to
discuss
some
of
the
scada
activities
and
the
9-1-1
calls,
and
things
like
that.
I
just
wanted
to
ask
mr
resendez
if,
if
there's
any
post
september,
9th
collaboration
between
you
and
kind
of
what
goes
on
in
the
in
the
scada
center,
if,
if
they're,
relying
on
someone
from
pg
e
to
go
on
scene
to
kind
of
give
them
feedback
for
what
happens,
and
yesterday
we
were
told
they
don't
call
9-1-1.
If
they
see
something
an
anomaly
at
the
scada
center.
Has
there
been
any
changes
to
that
post-accident.
I
That
is
actually
an
active
conversation,
a
very
timely
question.
Indeed,
thank
you,
yeah
we're.
Actually
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
I
think
kind
of
typifies.
You
know
an
incident
that
occurs.
You
know
whether
it
be
on
the
distribution
side
or
or
a
much
larger
scale.
Accident
like
happened
in
san
bruno,
is
that
oftentimes,
because
of
awareness
among
the
public
that
when
something
occurs,
their
first
call
is
usually
9-1-1.
I
So
it's
it's.
Typically
the
situation
where
they're
the
first
responder
of
all
the
first
responders
going
forward.
Yes,
they're,
actually
they're,
looking
at
our
policies
and
our
procedures
at
exactly
that
very
issue
to
you
know
assess
when
is
the
appropriate
time
to
make
that
phone
call
who
should
be
making
that
phone
call,
because
obviously
we
have
first
responders
out
there
who
go
and
make
an
initial
assessment
whereby
the
need
of
of
having
the
fire
or
the
police
department
present
there
in
order
to
secure
the
areas
is,
is
essential.
A
K
Rate
1-1,
yes,
the
the
common
ground
alliance.
Does
a
survey.
I
believe
it's
every
two
years
to
to
get
an
understanding
of
the
awareness
level
for
8-1-1,
and,
although
it's
not
where
we
would
like
it
to
be,
we
are
seeing
constant
improvement
in
in
the
awareness
of
the
responsibility
to
call
8-1-1
and
the
availability
of
the
number.
A
So
what
I'm
trying
to
understand
is
we
had
a
success
in
that
area
where
we
were
actually
able
to
change
behavior
and
get
information
out
and
people
actually
acted
on
it,
and
so
those
excavation
damage
accidents
have
been
going
down.
What
created
the
catalyst
or
the
success
in
seeing
that
be
effective,
and
that
communication
be
effective
and
can
we
translate
any
of
those
lessons
learned
to
the
public
general
public
awareness
side.
K
K
So
it's
about
getting
the
right
message
to
the
right
people
from
the
right
source.
I
think
carl
talked
a
little
bit
about
that
as
far
as
as
overall
awareness,
there
are
many
other
messages,
besides
damage
prevention
and
calling
8-1-1
that
we
need
to
convey-
and
that
can
be
a
bit
of
a
challenge
when
you're
trying
to
convey
so
many
different
messages
to
a
given
stakeholder
audience.
A
A
I
A
But
there
is
a
transmission
pipeline
that
runs
through
my
neighborhood
at
the
top
of
our
our
street
in
our
community
and
really
the
primary
reason
why
I
knew
that
is
because
I
saw
the
yellow
poles
sticking
out
of
the
ground
with
disk
on
them,
and
I
know
what
those
are,
because
I've
worked
in
the
transportation
field
for
almost
20
years,
and
I've
worked
on
pipeline
issues
in
particular.
But
most
people
don't
know
what
those
are.
Most
people
don't
even
know
what
they're
looking
at,
and
so
I
know
that,
along
that
right-of-way
there
are
those
markers.
A
But
I
have
to
tell
you:
there's
been
a
lot
of
acquisitions
and
mergers
over
the
years,
and
so
when
I
went
to
the
femsa
website
just
now,
I
didn't
even
know
who
the
name
of
that
transmission
line
operator
is
because
it's
not
the
distribution
line
that
provides
the
gas
to
my
home.
Washington.
Gas
provides
gas
to
my
home,
but
the
transmission
that
runs
through
our
neighborhood.
The
transmission
line
is
actually
dominion,
and
I
didn't
know
if
it
was
dominion
or
another
name.
A
When
I
went
to
look,
and
so
I
did
have
the
opportunity
to
go
to
the
map
and
look
at
it,
but
I
have
to
tell
you
your
average
consumer
isn't
going
to
go.
Do
that
they
are
not
going
to
know
in
particular
that
it
runs
through,
but
remember
somewhat.
I
do
think
that
if
you
have
a
right
of
way
running
through
your
property,
you
are
going
to
have
that
disclosure
when
you
go
to
settle
on
purchasing
property,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that
that
I
will.
A
I
live
in
that
neighborhood
and
I
don't
have
necessarily
the
pipeline
located
on
my
right
of
way.
But
it's
near
me
and
I
wouldn't
necessarily
know
that,
and
so
I
think
it's
a
real
challenge.
If
I
got
a
mailing
from
a
company
called
dominion-
and
I
didn't
know
what
pipelines
were,
I
probably
would
throw
it
in
the
trash
before
I
even
opened
it,
because
I
think
it
was
junk
mail.
I
mean
I
do
open
my
washington
gas
bill
because
I
know
that
they
should
be
mailing
something
to
me,
but
I
think
it's
a
real.
A
It's
a
real
difficulty,
and
this
goes
to
the
issue
that
member
rose
kind
was
saying:
there's
information
presented,
but
do
people
get
it?
Is
it
coming
in?
Are
they
internalizing
it
do
they
understand?
And
so
I
know
our
team
is
very
interested
in
this
issue.
We've
had
a
great
response
from
our
panelists
and
we
thank
you
very
much
for
your
participation
and
we
look
forward
to
continuing
to
work
with
you
as
this
investigation
proceeds
to
draw
on
your
expertise.
A
I
think
we
will
have
some
specific
comments,
our
questions
for
the
record,
and
particularly
for
mr
resendez,
but
given
that
our
time
is
short,
we
want
to
keep
on
schedule
we'll
potentially
file.
Those
in
writing
for
you,
okay,
thank
you
very
much.
The
second
panel
is
excuse.
Thank
you
for
your
service
and
we'll
take
a
break
for
lunch
and
we'll
come
back
at
one.
G
D
Q
I
R
Q
B
E
H
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
richard
clark:
I'm
the
director
of
the
consumer
protection
safety
division,
california,
public
utilities,
commission,
my
job
is
to
influence
and
implement
policy
within
the
commission
with
respect
to
natural
gas,
electricity,
communications,
freight
railroads,
passenger
railroads,
rail
transit
and
rail
crossings.
I
have
a
bachelor's
degree
from
san
diego
state
university
in
history,
political
science
and
sociology.
S
Can
you
hear
me
now?
Okay,
my
name
is
julie
halligan,
I'm
the
deputy
director
for
consumer
protection
and
safety
division
of
the
california
public
utilities.
Commission,
I
have
all
the
non-rail
programs
in
cpsd
that
includes
utility
safety,
gas
and
electric,
as
well
as
electric
generation
performance,
transportation
enforcement
and
consumer
fraud.
I've
been
at
the
commission
for
about
19
years.
I've
been
in
this
position
for
four
years.
Q
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
linda
dardy,
I'm
the
deputy
associate
administrator
for
the
pipeline
and
hazardous
materials,
safety
administration's
office
of
pipeline
safety.
My
group
includes
the
program,
development,
engineering,
regulatory
development
enforcement,
state
programs
and
training
and
qualification.
I
started
in
the
regulatory
business
about
20
years
ago.
I'm
a
chemical
engineer
and
I
started
as
an
inspector
and
accident
investigator
for
our
central
region,
so
I've
been
in
a
while.
R
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
zach
barrett,
I'm
the
director
of
state
programs.
I
have
the
responsibility
of
the
performance
evaluations
of
state
programs
and
distributing
the
associated
grant
funding
with
that
I've
been
with
the
organization
for
23
years
working
on
24
years,
I've
been
an
inspector
I've
been
a
senior
project
engineer,
leading
our
gas
integrity
management
regulation
development.
M
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
paul
metro,
I'm
chief
engineer
of
the
pennsylvania
public
utility
commission's
gas
safety
office.
I've
been
with
the
pennsylvania
public
utility
commission
for
about
26
years
today,
I'm
representing
the
national
association
of
pipeline
safety
representatives,
as
the
vice
chairman.
B
A
Thank
you
very
much,
miss
ward
and
welcome.
Back
to
mr
clark.
We
had
a
hearing
on
the
metrolink
accident
in
southern
california
a
few
years
ago
and
I
understand
how
how
the
breadth
of
your
responsibilities
goes
across
many
activities
and
areas,
and
thank
you
for
coming
back
after
having
participated
in
hearing
in
the
past.
T
T
E
We
would
use
fimsa's
gas
protocol
forms
their
im
protocol
checklist.
Basically
it's
about
168
pages
long
and
it
covers
about
14
areas
which
basically
covers
the
entire
im
program,
and
we
would
conduct
these
audits
using
that
protocol
going
through
the
checklist
and
reviewing
related
procedures,
records,
project
files
pertaining
to
their
program
and
throughout.
E
T
T
E
Well,
we
had
an
area
of
concern
where
a
contractor
they
hired
a
third-party
contractor
to
review
their
risk
management
plan
to
review
their
ili
process
and
their
ecda
process,
and
they
the
consultant,
found
some
areas
of
conscious
concern.
So
they
pg
e
went
ahead
and
remediate
those
issues
and-
and
we
looked
at
that.
E
T
E
P
E
E
T
T
E
Again
same
thing:
procedural
issues:
there
was
one
issue
where
80
percent,
while
loss
they
had
classified
it.
They
didn't
classify
that
as
a
immediate.
However,
by
the
end
of
the
audit,
they
actually
revised
their
plans
and
procedures
that
they
would
state
that
if
it
was
a
80
wall
loss
they'll
consider
that
as
an
immediate
finding.
E
T
T
T
E
E
E
Yes,
in
the
2010
audit,
we
found
issues
where
pg
e
had
used
exception
reports
more
frequently
than
than
needed.
They
exception.
Reports
should
basically
use
when
they
can't
meet
a
certain
time
frame
or
certain
things
that
they
can't
do.
However,
they
were
actually
using
some
of
these
exception
reports
to
basically
from
keeping
from
them
to
do
certain
procedural
things
that
they
were
required
to
do.
E
E
E
T
T
E
E
T
T
T
E
E
We
usually
for
us
to
be
qualified
integrity
management
inspectors.
We
go
through
two
courses
from
that
are
offered
by
fimsa
and
they
are
gas
integrity,
management
protocol
course
and
also
the
other
course
is
called
safety
evaluation
of
inline
inspection,
which
is
ili
or
taking
programs
courses.
So
that's
two
courses
we
take
and
also
we
take
there's
seven
web-based
training
that
we
do
for
the
im
course.
T
T
H
H
A
P
S
They
each
have
one
one
distribution,
one
transmission
unit
and
we'll
audit
those
once
every
year.
Typically,
that's
our
goal,
but
again
we
we
do
it
as
frequently
as
we
can
given
our
resources
and
we
try
to
increase
them
when
we
see
something
that
necessitates
increasing
the
frequency
of
the
audit.
Thank.
P
P
Q
Okay,
I
would
say
that
universally
we
are
finding
similar
issues
across
the
country.
We
are
finding
during
our
integrity
management
reviews
that
operators
perhaps
are
not
doing
as
robust
an
assessment
risk
assessment,
we're
finding
that
there
are
areas
that
are
requiring
changes
in
improvement
and
that
we
are
going
to
be
partnering
later
this
summer.
For
a
workshop
to
address
those
very
issues,
there
are
changes
that
need
to
be
made
and
improvements
that
need
to
occur.
P
Q
We
do
not
determine
the
specific
frequency
that
would
be
based
on
the
state's
allocation
of
resources
and
priorities
and
risks.
One
thing
that
was
mentioned
was
that
there
are
a
variety
of
different
types
of
inspections.
Integrity
management
is
one
of
many.
So
in
a
state
where
you
have
a
lot
of
construction,
you
might
be
doing
more
construction.
P
Q
We
review
them
at
a
very
high
level.
State
and
federal
inspection
results
are
loaded
into
a
database,
and
so
we
look
at
those
results
by
allocating
them
into
buckets.
So
we
can
do
some
trend
analysis
to
analyze
the
type
of
thing
I
just
reported
that
risk
assessment
is
an
area
of
more
work,
so
we
do
some
aggregate,
it's
not
detailed
review
at
the
state
level,
except
during
our
annual
reviews.
We
may
go
into
it
in
more
depth.
P
M
P
M
Imp
has
been
in
in
the
works
for
about
nine
years
and
we
haven't
seen
any
studies
as
to
whether
performance-based
measures
are
working
or
if
we
need
more
prescriptive
regulations.
Maybe
in
some
areas
we
need
to
see
that
study.
We
need
to
start
mining
the
data
that
we're
we're
gathering
for
for
imp
and
take
a
look
at
that.
Maybe
we
need
to
make
some
adjustments.
P
M
M
P
O
H
H
O
H
O
H
All
told
currently
we
have
13
inspectors,
two
supervisors,
so
that's
15,
probably
20
pys,
directly
pys
being
personnel
years
about
20
pys
directly
involved,
and
then
there
would
be
involvement
across
the
commission
in
terms
of
administrative
law,
judges
and
attorneys
for
enforcement
actions
and
rule
makings
and
commissioners
and
commissioned
staff.
So
I'm
I'm
sorry,
I'm
not
I'm
not,
including
the
the
folks
in
the
division
of
ratepayer
advocates,
I'm
also
not
including
the
folks
in
the
energy
division
who
work
on
gas.
O
H
H
O
H
O
H
Project
the
ms
halligan
is
much
more
of
an
expert
in
this
regard
than
I
am,
but
the
generally
speaking,
the
utilities
come
together,
come
forward
to
the
commission
in
a
in
a
gas
accord
case
or
in
a
general
rate
case,
and
they
ask
for
a
certain
amount
of
money
with
regard
to
their
gas
operations
and
the
commission
approves
it
or
denies
it
or
modifies
the
request
issues.
A
decision
on
it
and
the
expenditures
are
then
not
tracked.
S
One
of
the
interveners
is
the
commission's
division
of
rate
payer
advocates
and
their
primary
responsibility
is
to
make
sure
that
rates
are
just
and
reasonable,
and
to
look
closely
at
the
utilities,
application
for
revenues
and
rates
to
review
that
the
utilities,
safety
and
reliability
branch
we
don't
participate
directly
in
the
rate
cases
we'll
provide
advisory
support
to
the
alj
or
to
the
energy
division.
That's
reviewing.
S
The
rate
case
will
also
provide
technical
support
to
the
division
of
rate
payer
advocates
if
they're
reviewing
a
particular
part
of
a
utilities,
application
that
has
to
do
with
maintenance
and
operation
expenditures
or
capital
projects,
and
they
want
to
know
what
we
think
of
it
or
whether
it
whether
it's
reasonable
staff
from
dra,
has
periodically
in
the
past,
come
to
the
utility
safety
group
to
ask
for
an
opinion
on
what
we
think
of
particular
particular
projects.
But
in
general
there
are
any
number
of
interveners
that
can
participate
in
the
utilities
rate
case.
S
Well,
when
the,
when
the
operators
come
to
the
commission
for
rate
increase
they're,
either
coming
on
the
for
the
distribution
revenues
they're
going
into
a
general
rate
case,
application
for
the
transmission
costs,
they
file
those
currently
as
part
of
a
gas
transmission
and
storage
application.
Those
applications
cover
backbone,
transmission,
local
transmission
storage
operations
and
customer
access
charges
for
those
for
those
groups.
So
when
the
utilities
file
rate
cases
or
for
those
costs
they're
covering
all
the
costs
to
provide
those
services
to
their
customers,
they're
forecasting
the
rates
for
all
of
those
areas
and.
O
S
O
M
There
has
been
a
a
tremendous
pressure
across
the
nation
to
keep
rates
low.
I
can
specifically
speak
to
pennsylvania
that
we
went
through
a
restructuring
process
in
the
year
2000
and
essentially
came
out
of
the
gas
restructuring
process,
with
rate
freezes
for
anywhere
from
seven
to
ten
years
and
doing
those
rate
freezes.
There
was
a
lot
of
pressure
on
the
gas
utilities
to
save
whatever
revenues
they
could
and
at
times
pipeline
replacement
was
one
of
the
areas
on
which
they
decreased.
M
O
T
T
M
M
Q
T
M
T
Mr
hardy,
yesterday
there
was
discussion
from
pg
e's
integrity
management
team,
suggesting
during
panel
2
that
they
might
have
a
pre-1961
d
cell
weld
problem
on
line
132,
and
I
just
wonder
that
was
first
time.
I'd
heard
of
anything
like
that
is
femsa
exploring
this,
or
is
this
a
matter
that
fence
is
going
to
take
up.
Q
Well,
definitely,
any
seam
issue
is
obviously
of
concern
to
us
and
when
we
find
information
that
could
tell
us
that
there's
a
problem
out
there
or
could
be
systematic
or
widespread
we're
going
to
research
it
and
see
if
art
we
have
data
to
support
it.
We
also,
I
mentioned
a
risk
management
or
risk
assessment
workshop.
We
are
also
having
a
workshop
on
seam
issues
to
explore
that
very
kind
of
issue
and
find
out
what
is
out
there
and
what
we
need
to
learn
more
and
then
we'll
take
some
action.
D
T
H
We
have
not
not
that
I
know
of
that
we've
seen
any
issues
with
regard
to
d
saw
pipe.
However,
one
of
our
first
actions
following
the
incident
was
to
have
all
the
utilities
find
locate
all
of
the
30
inch
desaw
pipe
that
they
had
in
their
systems
and
that
had
not
been
hydro,
tested
and
reduced.
The
pressure
by
20
percent.
T
T
T
E
E
and
in
the
five
years
preceding
an
hca
or
the
preceding
five
years.
If
they
don't
get
up
to
the
375
value,
then
they,
if
they
do
let's
say
in
the
last
five
years,
the
highest
pressure
that
they
ran
on
that
line
was
300.
and
they've
been
operating
at
250
for
the
rest
of
the
next
few
years.
And
if
that
pressure
goes
above
the
300
pressure,
then
they'll
have
to
do
some
sort
of
assessment
if
it
meets
192.
E
E
E
H
E
R
The
619
sets
the
maximum
allowable
operating
pressure
and
there's
nothing
in
the
regulations
that
prevents
the
company
from
raising
the
pressure
up
to
the
maximum
allowable
operating
pressure
every
five
years.
The
integrity
management
rule
under
under
917
just
sets
triggers
for
when
the
scenes
would
be
considered
unstable
and
it
would
trigger
assessment
through
an
integrity
management
plan.
R
So
the
raising
the
pressure
to
the
five
the
five
year
high
mop
is
about
setting
that
trigger
that.
If
you
go
over
that
that
triggers
assessments
for
any
seams
on
that
pipeline
that
have
not
been
pressure
tested.
If
there
has
been
a
pressure
test
on
the
seams,
be
it
d-saw
seams
or
be
it
erw
seams.
We
consider
those
stable
if
there's
a
pipe
that
has
not
had
a
pressure
test,
then
those
seams.
R
T
Q
T
R
Q
We
have
some
information
to
that,
I'm
trying
to
recall
whether
it
is
submitted.
I
don't
think
we
have
any
specific
data,
we
have
more
voluntary
submitted
information
and
I
don't
know
what
those
numbers
are.
I
suspect
that
your
next
question
I
can
check
and
see
what
we
do
have
available
and
supply
it
to
you
later
for
the
record.
Q
You
know,
I
think,
that,
yes,
we
would
like
to
know
that
I
think
that
we
need
to
acknowledge.
There
are
various
ways
that
pipelines
can
be
assessed:
hydrostatic,
testing,
internal
inspection,
there
are
different
risks
and
different
tools
and
assessment
methods
may
best
suit
the
type
of
threats
and
risks,
but
definitely
we
would
like
to
see
more
lines.
T
Q
Q
O
E
We
look
at
the
basically
what's,
provided
is
a
matrix
that
pg
e
would
provide
to
us,
or
any
utility
company
would
provide
to
us.
This
matrix
would
include
the
protocol
in
one
column
and
then
the
next
column
would
include
where,
in
the
procedures
that
they
meet
this
protocol,
and
so
we
go
through
their
procedures
to
make
sure
everything
that's
written
in
their
procedures
are
what's
in
the
protocol
and
we
look
at
the
procedures
and
then,
after
that,
we
look
at
project
files
to
make
sure
that
they
are
following
those
procedures.
O
O
E
O
O
E
Oh
basically,
the
pg
e
hired
a
third-party
contractor
in
2007
to
look
over
their
ili
or
in-line
inspection
process
and
their
program
and
look
at
their
ecda
process
and
program,
and
the
third
party
consultant
found
some
deficiencies
either
in
their
plans
or
the
way
they
ran
their
process
and
we
didn't
have
a
the
cpuc.
We
didn't
have
a
clear
picture
of
when
they
actually
implemented.
These
deficiencies
that
were
found
by
the
third
party
contractor.
E
O
S
Well,
certainly,
since
the
incident
in
san
bruno
we'd
like
to
be
able
to
audit
the
transmission
integrity
management
program
much
more
frequently
every
year,
if
we
could,
as
you
know,
we've
we
did
an
initial
audit
along
with
fimsa
in
2005,
and
then
we
got
back
to
pg
e's
integrity
management
program
in
2010.
Those
are
the
only
two
we've
done.
We
haven't
yet
concluded
our
2010
audit
in
the
sense
that
we've
given
pg
e
our
findings,
but
because
of
the
intervening
the
situation
in
san
bruno.
S
S
E
I
O
R
Have
a
evaluation
forum
evaluation
program
that
we
have
developed
through
the
years
from
working
with
stakeholders
such
as
the
napster
members
through
the
years
there's
a
ground
allocation
committee
that
helps
populate
the
questions
on
what
a
pipeline
safety
a
good
pipeline
state
pipeline
safety
program
or
pipeline
safety
program
should
have
we
also
they're
on
that
evaluation
form,
there's
actually
four
recommendations
from
ntsb.
You
know
dealing
with
cash
iron
and
dealing
with
emergency
response,
so
we
take
into
consideration
from
all
of
our
stakeholders
what
what
should
be
in
that
form
annually.
R
We
also
review
information
that
is
provided
to
us
by
states
dealing
with
their
their
their
safety
authority
the
amount
of
jurisdiction
they
have
the
amount
of
recommended
person
days
that
they
they're
able
to
accomplish
during
inspections,
their
their
compliance,
their
ability
to
adopt
our
pipeline
safety
regulations
and
and
several
other
factors
that
we
we
include
in
that
scoring.
Based
on
that
score
and
availability
of
the
of
the
funding
that
we
have,
we
basically
distribute
the
pipeline
safety
grant
to
states.
R
R
R
R
O
R
O
R
O
R
To
kind
of
expand
up
on
that
you
know:
we've
we've
been
evaluating
states
in
the
pipeline
safety
since
1971,
so
we've
been
trying
to.
Obviously
you
know
our
goal
is
to
get
states
to
score
as
as
high
as
possible,
because
that
means
that
they're
meeting
they're
aligning
their
programs
with
our
and
they're
meeting
the
mandates
that
we
have
out
there.
So
most
pipeline
safety
programs
score
in
the
high
90s.
R
R
You
know
on
the
clock,
so
I
believe
that's
a
challenge
also
in
some
of
our
states
that,
where
they're,
where
they're
producing
states
where
the
industry
is
doing
well
and
where
our
engineers
are
getting
up
to
speed-
and
they
have
you-
know
good
backgrounds
and
good
talents,
the
the
industry
is
robbing
basically
cultivating
that
good
talent
to
go
to
work
for
them
because
their
salaries
are
higher.
So
that's
also
a
challenge,
I
think,
to
hold
good
state
pipeline
safety.
Employees
they're
well
trained
that
they
have
experience
years
of
experience.
R
M
M
The
funding
levels
have
been
have
been
over
the
last
five
years,
anywhere
from
40
percent
to
64
percent,
it's
hard
for
state
programs
to
budget
and
go
out
and
say
okay
over
the
next
three
years.
I
know
I'm
going
to
get
a
certain
amount
of
r
of
grant
from
the
from
fimsa
I'm
going
to
be
able
to
go
out
and
hire
two
or
three
additional
engineers,
because
the
funding
levels
are
bouncing
up
and
down.
It's
very
difficult
for
the
states
to
plan
how
they're
going
to
spend
this
money
in
the
long
run.
O
H
O
In
light
of
this
environment,
I
mean
we're
states
as
well
as
the
federal
government
are
all
in
a
very
severe
budget
predicament.
Obviously
I
would
pose
the
question
to
mr
mr
metro,
mr
barrett,
ms
doherty
and
mr
clark.
Again
what
types
of
things
could
operators
and
regulators
do
to
make
the
best
of
the
situation.
O
M
Yes,
in
pennsylvania
about
five
years
ago,
we
realized
that
we
were
going
to
have
funding
issues
and
we
didn't
have
the
resources
that
we
needed
to
do
the
job.
The
way
we
wanted
to
do
it.
So
we
implemented
a
risk
assessment
program
where
we
went
out
and
mined
our
data
that
we
had
and
say.
Okay,
where
can
we
put
the
resources?
That's
going
to
give
us
the
biggest
bang
for
the
buck
and
reduce
reportable
incidents,
reduce
non-compliance,
and
we
implemented
that
and
we've
seen
some
some
very
good
results.
M
R
And
I
would
agree
with
mr
metro
in
our
evaluation
form,
we've
actually
been
trying
to
drive
states
towards
risk
assessment,
risk
prioritization
of
their
inspection
units,
their
operators
to
inspect
we're,
also
working
to
share
data
better
amongst
ourselves
in
the
states
and
to
learn
more
from
the
data
that
we
have.
As
paul
said
earlier,
we're
trying
to
you
know,
run
the
data
to
try
to
look
for
trends.
Look
for
information
that
could
be
helpful
to
target
inspection
efforts.
Q
I
would
agree
with
everything
that
has
been
said.
I
would
also
mention
I
was
surprised
it
didn't
come
up
when
we
were
talking
about
constraints
and
challenges.
We
have
rolled
out
an
incredible
number
of
new
regulations
over
the
last
decade:
control
room
management,
distribution,
integrity
management.
Q
We
have
operator
qualifications,
states
with
small
staffs,
have
to
absorb
these
new
regulations,
so
it
takes
an
intense
amount
of
training.
So
it's
a
burden
so
bringing
all
the
states
up
to
speed
is
also
a
challenge.
One
of
the
ways
that
we
are
trying
to
mitigate
that
is
to
leverage
each
other's
resources
and
skills.
Q
You
had
to
ask
you
know
ways
we
can
overcome
without
more
money
funding
the
states
without
growing
those
programs.
How
can
we
achieve
good
safety
results
and
one
of
the
ways
that
we
can
do
that
is
utilizing
our
data
identifying
the
highest
risks,
helping
each
other
out
identifying
where
we,
where
the
feds
do
and
inspection
of
an
operator
that
a
state
may
also
have
regulatory
authority
over?
Maybe
they
can
use
our
results.
Q
Yes,
I
mean
we
have,
we
recognized,
we
had
these
issues
years
ago
and
we
have
made
an
effort
to
share
information
to
improve
our
information
exchange
and
we're
not
there.
Yet
we
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do,
but
we
are
trying
to
help
each
other
as
as
partners
we
are.
We
serve
the
public.
We
work
together
to
protect
the
public
as
best
as
we
can
and
by
helping
each
other.
We
reach
that
goal.
H
We're
taking
a
multi-faceted
approach,
first
of
all,
we're
not
giving
up
on
the
conversation
of
of
what
the
adequate
resources
are
in
order
to
ensure
high
level
higher
level
of
safety
in
the
gas
systems.
We're
having
robust
discussions
across
the
state
in
that
regard,
but
we're
also
we've
undertaken
a
rule
making
at
the
commission
where
we're
we're,
taking
a
look
essentially
at
the
rate,
making
aspects
we're
taking
a
look
at
the
prescriptive
rules
and
we're
also
talking
taking
a
look
at
performance-based
rate
performance
based
safety
approach.
H
Another
aspect
of
what
we're
doing
is:
we've
undertaken
a
rule
making
to
determine
whether
or
not
the
mobile
home
parks
where
we
spend
a
considerable
amount
of
time
doing
inspections,
whether
or
not
those
master,
metered
mobile
home
parks
should
be
in
fact
absorbed
by
the
utilities
instead,
so
the
utilities
are
are
responsible
for
the
safety
of
those
systems
rather
than
each
owner
of
each
particular
master.
Metered
mobile
home
park
having
to
have
a
trained
and
qualified
operator
and
having
to
to
know
how
the
system
works
and
and
and
the
whole
nine
yards.
H
We
have
very
good
information
in
our
databases-
databases
built
by
our
engineers,
who
also
do
the
the
inspective
work
and
we're
we're
looking
at
ways
that
we
can
bring
that
data
together
to
be
able
to
to
trend
going
out
looking
into
the
future.
We've
recently
begun
trending
going
out
into
the
future,
so
we
can
more
target
our
investigative
inspective
efforts.
O
P
Okay,
yesterday,
during
the
interviews,
pg
e
told
us
that,
on
their
on
their
sheets,
when
the
information
is
not
available
or
is
unknown,
they
take
quote
unquote
most
conservative
value
and
my
question
is:
if
a
operator
does
not
know
what
kind
of
pipe
they
have
in
the
ground.
What
is
the
most
conservative
value.
Q
In
a
situation
where
a
pipeline
operator
does
not
know
what
they're
dealing
with
that,
the
general
premise
that
you
need
to
be
conserved
is
kind
of
kind
of
obvious.
If
you
don't
know
what
you
have,
you
must
choose
a
the
most
conservative
value
now.
Having
said
that,
identifying
what
that
actually
means
would
be
challenging.
Q
You
might
look
at
what
available
information
is
out
there,
what
it
might
likely
mean,
but,
as
was
mentioned
yesterday,
you
would
need
to
add
another
safety
factor,
there's
nothing
in
the
regulations
that
I'm
aware
of
that
would
specifically
state
how
you
would
get
to
that.
We
would
expect
an
operator
to
provide
a
technical
engineering
justification
on
how
they
arrived
at
that
decision.
Q
P
Q
That
not
really
sure
how
to
answer
that
question.
If
someone
does
not
know
what
they
have
in
the
ground,
then
they
have
to
figure
out
a
way
of
either
determining
what
they
have
in
the
ground,
based
on
good
technical
engineering
justification.
Maybe
they
dig
it
up
and
examine
it?
Maybe
they
have
other
information
that
would
allow
them
to
apply
a
safety
factor,
but
if
you're
looking
for
a
value,
I
can't
provide
what
a
minimum
value
might
be.
G
Q
P
So
if
I
have
30
inch
pipe,
I
do
not
know
I
have
bends
in
them.
I
do
not
have
pups
in
them
and
I
do
not
know
what
material
I
have
to
me.
The
most
conservative
value
is
probably
the
lowest
grade.
Steel
that
comes
in
with
the
lowest
seem
well
factor
that
comes
in
and
with
all
the
lowest
values.
Has
that
been
done?
Mr
lee,
in
line
132's
case.