AGA Distribution Best Practices Program 2011-2013 Con Ed Highlights

Agenda Best Practice Overview Best Practice Program High level observations and analysis of the benchmarking graphs Results of the roundtable sessions 2013 Best Practice Program Timeline

Best Practice Overview Considered as one of AGA’s signature and most valuable programs Benchmarking is an effort to identify procedures of superior-performing gas industry companies and innovative work practices that can be used to improve participants' operations and reduce cost  One of the oldest and most popular ones programs having been started in 1994 Process Overview: Modification of the selected benchmarking topics Collection of data from SME’s which is then entered into the AGA BESS system. Data analysis to determine Companies invited to present Best Practices round table sessions Round table sessions with SME’s from each utility (share operating and maintenance practices) SME to present and potentially implement best practices within their respective area

Summary of Results Provide high level observation of how Con Edison compared to all other utilities 2011 System Reliability Damage Prevention Leak Management 2012 System Regulation and Valve Inspection Operator Qualification Training Provide a high level overview of the SME round table session ‘take-aways” Provide a source of the graphs and confidentiality disclaimer for future use of the data

Damage Prevention – Round table sessions Performance-based locate contracts Damage due to utility cross boring Marker balls Jameson lateral gas line tracer Tracer tape Tracer wire checks Bumper stickers Maximizing the damage bill Recognition of mark-out personnel QA/QC program for marker vendors Tracking at-fault equipment operators

Leak Survey and Leak Repair – Round Table Sessions (comments from SME) Leak classification and leak documentation  Con Ed was a leader in this category: Technicians classify all leaks from type 1 to a type 3 and the supervisors review the leaks, while other utilities classify their leaks, workable or non-workable.  In some case, classification is done by a supervisor after the technician does the initial investigation. Reports/records and management data Con Ed was ahead of other utilities as it relates to the use of the electronic. However, we lag behind in record keeping of survey records.  Con Ed still uses paper records while other utilities have on line mapping, computerized mobile (electronic format) and walking surveys Recommendation being pursued as a result with a goal to move away from the use of paper records for leak survey activities   Leak repair SME’s input on leak repair was minimal Sending an SME for leak repair would have maximized the full potential of this round table session Additional Discussion Discussed integrated leak/map program Leak detection technology Link up electronic record Automatic email process

External Corrosion - – Round Table Sessions (comments from SME) NACE wording on considering IR drop when recording pipe to soil readings DC de-couplers: This device is used to mitigate AC corrosion. Even though we haven’t had evidence AC corrosion of on our system, Corrosion followed up on the potential use of this device can help mitigate stray AC voltage on affected cathodic protection rectifiers. Cased piping: Most operators fill their casings with wax to address shorted casing and carrier pipe Sleeved piping: Use of Isonic 2006 to assess pipes in a wall penetration. Potential R&D project to pursue for Transmission Gas and Electric manhole points of entries Excavation Safety: The safety of workers on excavated pipelines was discussed and most companies practiced the same methods as Con Ed but also incorporate local ground mats to secure the safety of the workers. This could possibly eliminate the arcing that is sometimes present when welding is being performed on the transmission gas main.

QC – Round table sessions Review Puget Sound Energy’s method of producing Corrective Action Requests (CARs) for continuous improvement. Gas QA uses the Action Tracking System which records and tracks commitments made by the audited organization in response to a Finding and Recommendation. The concept of assigning key gas processes a process owner or champion Significantly more staffing would be needed. Presently, Gas QA members review various different processes at different times of the year. Having what PG&E has would provide a more detailed focus on the process as opposed to a general review of it. The way PG&E calculates an assessment score for each process they audit Understanding how PG&E grades could give us a means to simplify our presentation of findings in the form of some kind of score. Performing re-digs It would prove to be costly and would adversely impact our O&M expenses. A more intelligent approach could be to halt a selected project prior to backfilling so that the installation may be independently viewed in the field, and all documentation for the job reviewed.

2013 Best Practice Timeline and Process January - the process has a kick-off meeting Modification of the selected benchmarking topics February - Collection of data from SME’s March - Data packet results entered into the AGA BESS system May - Questionnaire results entered into AGA survey monkey June – Follow-up meeting to review results and identify companies to present at the Round table sessions July – December – Roundtable sessions Subject matter experts share operating and maintenance practices Opportunities to learn and to develop relationships that provide benefits far beyond the benchmarking process  SME’s – utilize, implement and/or pursue best practices learned

Appendix

System Reliability Overview Charts See Appendix for all benchmarking graphs and scatter plots

Damage Prevention Charts

Leak Survey & Leak Repair Charts

External Corrosion Charts

2012 System Regulation and Valve Inspection Charts

2012 Operator Qualification Training Charts

2012 Gas Control Room Management Charts