| Independently Powered Energy News

Companies in California that operate natural gas transmission lines could be compelled to develop and submit gas pipeline pressure testing measures or line replacement plans to the California Public Utilities Commission. A newly-proposed rulemaking issued May 10 by CPUC administrative law judge Maribeth Bushey is meant to “achieve the goal of orderly and cost effectively replacing or testing all natural gas transmission pipelines that have not been pressure tested,” she wrote. Her ruling, which is subject to CPUC approval, comes in the wake of the Sept. 9, 2010, gas transmission line rupture that killed eight people and destroyed 38 homes in San Bruno. It also follows months of attempts by the National Transportation Safety Board to get Pacific Gas & Electric, the operator of the ruptured San Bruno line, to provide full design, construction, and maintenance records for all its pipelines. One of the reasons the full records are being sought is that PG&E’s as-built drawings and alignment sheets for the segment of the line that failed declared that it was built using seamless steel pipe. However, it was later found that the segment was constructed with structurally weaker seam-welded pipe. The proposal calls for all gas pipeline operators in the state to submit their transmission pipeline comprehensive pressure testing implementation plans within 60 days of the order taking effect. Her decision also states that each test, which would be conducted using high-pressure water, should: -Provide for interim safety enhancement measures, including increased patrols and leak surveys, pressure reductions, and prioritization of pressure testing for critical pipelines; -Set forth criteria used if pipeline segments are identified for replacement instead of pressure testing; and -Contain a priority rank and schedule for pressure testing previously untested pipeline. Regulators are expected to consider whether to adopt the ruling June 9 at the earliest. Bushey’s proposed decision came in the midst of CPUC’s series of public hearings on natural gas pipeline safety. The last of the three meetings was conducted May 16 in Santa Rosa. The first two were May 12 in Los Angeles and April 5 in San Bruno. The final two hearings were sparsely attended, with only half a dozen speakers addressing Bushey on each occasion. Some members of the public took the opportunity to rail against the installation of smart meters. But one speaker, Jim Findley, who identified himself as a 38-year PG&E employee and shareholder who’s worked in the gas department for over 25 years, aired a laundry list of concerns, including his perception that part of the problem at his utility is reduced manpower. “The utilities have been allowed to let their workforces dwindle to almost nothing. It’s absolutely a scandal,” he said. “In my headquarters where I work, San Rafael, we have approximately 25 percent of the workforce that we did 25 years ago.” Findley also took the opportunity to complain about maintenance schedules. “We’ve been subjected to lengthening maintenance cycles on both the transmission and distribution systems. This has not enhanced reliability,” he said, adding that at one point, PG&E had contemplated not inspecting pipelines until they failed. Additionally, Findley took a moment to take a swipe at investor-owned utilities’ “smart” meter initiative, saying that PG&E was “obsessed” with the technology. “Do we need $2 billion worth of ‘smart’ meters?” he asked rhetorically. “We’d be much better off putting that money into pipes and wires.”

No Result