David Johnson November 13, 2014 Regulatory Update David Johnson November 13, 2014

Wait a minute . . . As we go through this today, you’re gonna think, Wait a minute, here. Isn’t this the same stuff you talked about last year? Did you just recycle the same presentation and reorganize it to make it look different? And where’s that fried turkey picture? Well, it’s right here, and the oil is getting hotter -

And the reason this stuff looks familiar is - - -

There is a lot in the works, but not moving very quickly Gas transmission mega-rule Valve and rupture detection rule Miscellaneous amendments State damage prevention enforcement OQ, cost recovery, notifications Safety of hazardous liquid pipelines Excess flow valves Standards Update Plastic pipe

And not rules, yet Class location requirements GIS / NPMS information collection Safety management systems Midstream jurisdiction Advisories

Gas Transmission Mega-Rule Expanded HCA definition – PIR, MCA Additional IM requirements – in and out of HCA/MCA Anomaly response & repair criteria More gathering lines included EC, IC, SCC requirements IVP – MAOP confirmation PHMSA schedule – NPRM 1-28-2015, 60-day comment period

IVP MAOP confirmation A process that parallels 192.619 (a) (sort of) for vintage and other lines Talked about it last year You remember the proposed flowchart

IVP Flowchart (real)

IVP Flowchart (published)

Valve and Rupture Detection Rule Mandatory automated valves for HCA, Class 3 & 4 locations Rupture detection integrated into valve operation Goal is rapid mitigation and enunciation of large release events Anticipated bias toward automatic rather than remote operation SCADA and alarm impacts Likely based on two reports containing significant misperceptions PHMSA schedule – NPRM 5-1-2015, 90-day comment period

Miscellaneous Amendments Rail shipment of pipe must be per API 5L1 1.5 x MAOP test for all ASME vessels Welder & welding operator definition and requalification Individual cannot inspect own work Lateral definition impacting odorization requirements PHMSA schedule – Final Rule 2-4-2015

State Damage Prevention Enforcement Minimal impact to operators Primarily a PHMSA – State issue Allows PHMSA to enforce state laws if states ineffective May also include one-call requirements differing from current PHMSA schedule – Final Rule 2-4-2015

OQ, Cost Recovery, Notifications Expansion of OQ (new construction?) Renewal process for special permits More stringent incident reporting Cost recovery for design reviews / construction inspections PHMSA schedule – NPRM 1-28-2015, 90-day comment period

Safety of Hazardous Liquid Pipelines Expansion of HCA definition / assessments beyond HCAs Response / repair criteria in and outside HCA Leak detection beyond HCAs Expanding regulation and reporting of currently exempt lines – more and smaller gathering lines PHMSA schedule – NPRM 11-20-2014, 90-day comment period

Excess Flow Valves EFVs on all new and renewed gas service lines EFVs on all practicable structures other than single family dwellings Could cover farm taps or non-LDC direct-feed customers PHMSA schedule – NPRM 11-3-2014, 90-day comment period

Standards Update Update IBR standards in 192, 193, 195 Addresses 22 of 60+ IBR standards Must be available for free to the public “On the internet” requirement eliminated PHMSA to determine what constitutes “free to the public” PHMSA schedule – NPRM 8-16-2013, FR stage

Plastic Pipe Authorized use of PA12 AGA petition to raise D.F. from 0.32 to 0.40 for PE pipe Enhanced Tracking and traceability Miscellaneous revisions for PE and PA11 pipelines Additional provisions for fittings used on plastic pipe PHMSA schedule – NPRM stage

Class Location Requirements PLS Act requirement to study Do IMP actions reduce the need for class locations? Unlikely that class location requirements will disappear Potential for significant reduction in class location dependence on future pipelines However, extensive IM would be required PHMSA actions – Public meeting 4-16-2014 Report to Congress under review No additional reports, publication or rulemaking schedule

GIS / NPMS Information Collection Increased positional accuracy in NPMS ± 5 ft in HCA, ± 50 ft elsewhere Collection of data on 31 attributes – OD, WT, Gr, seam, age, MAOP, product, class location, HCA, valves, leak detection, throughput, etc. Info to help – emergency responders, local officials, risk assessments, maybe annual reports Extremely expensive PHMSA schedule – Workshop in November 17, 2014 Earliest effective date - 2016

Safety Management Systems NTSB recommendation P-12-17 to API to develop standard for safety management systems (arose from Enbridge failure) Draft API-RP-1173 balloted – 999 comments PHMSA heavily involved and highly supportive Structured around 10 elements What to do, but not how to do it Good concepts, but extremely prescriptive PHMSA says will not be in regulations, but it will be an “expectation” & could be enforced through Safety Orders Several references to “regulation” at recent TPAG PHMSA schedule – none known

Midstream Jurisdiction Jurisdiction question raised about a year ago Ad hoc group from advisory committee studying Clarify PHMSA vs OSHA jurisdiction of facilities for: Dehydration NG processing NGL liquids fractionation Petrochemical operations Storage Terminal operations & transportation Goal – minimize regulatory gaps and overlaps

Advisories Program evaluation and metrics Conversion / reversal guidance Construction notification – 60 days before “construction related activities”, include materials purchasing, off site fabrication Enbridge lessons – deficiencies in IM, control center, public awareness Recall of some TDW repair clamps Telephonic notification time limit – 1 hour Reporting MAOP exceedances Communication during emergency situations Verification of MAOP records

Metrics Guidance October 2014 – Program Evaluation & Meaningful Metrics Rigorous program evaluation Leading and lagging indicators Plan – do – check – act Goals, metrics and more metrics 6 – 12 “meaningful” metrics – publicize Or maybe 100 or so Gas & Liquid teams developing Finalize enforcement metrics (?) Apparent close ties to SMS

Program Evaluation Flowchart

Metrics Example   Leading ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Indicators‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Lagging Failure Mechanism Selected Process or Operational Activities for Threat Prevention or Management Deterioration Indicators Failure or Direct Integrity Metrics Other Third Party Damage, including vandalism, third‐party vehicle contact with facility, interferences and other intentional or unintentional acts ● ROW and patrolling program ● Line marking program ● Training and OQ tasks ● Depth of Cover survey program ● Use of Damage Information Reporting Tool (DIRT) report data ● Public awareness program ● Physical protection of aboveground facilities ● No. of patrol reports that have not had necessary follow‐up completed ● Reports by law enforcement agencies and first responder agencies ● No. of pig runs with indicated damage ● No. of sites lacking security fencing and / or cameras or other features ● No. of susceptible sites lacking vehicle impact barriers ● No. of aboveground facilities hit by vehicles ● No. of vandalism incidents without a release ● Incidents of damage due to underground inference with adjacent structures, utilities, etc. ● Releases due to third‐party damage ● Releases due to prior excavation‐related damage ● Releases due to prior non‐excavation‐ related mechanical damage

Conversion & Reversal Guidance September 2014 PHMSA Guidance doc issued Covers conversions, reversals, product changes Largely follows existing regulations Helps point out factors & changes that need to be considered Pressure & temperature profile changes HCA identification Valve and leak detection requirements Emergency response / spill considerations

PG&E San Bruno The CPUC has proposed a $1.4 billion fine – in addition to what has already been spent on the system U.S. DOJ has issued a superseding indictment – 28 counts Indictment issues – Obstruction, records, threat identification, baseline plan and assessment methods Estimated PG&E derived gains of $281 million and victims suffered losses of $565 million No individual indictments – yet PG&E appealing fine, pleading not-guilty to indictment

Recent GAO Report DOT regulation has not kept pace with transportation environment Large gathering lines, same risk as transmission, remain outside regulations Recommend rulemaking to address gathering pipeline safety PHMSA agrees and is developing proposed regulations

Web Locations Advisory Bulletins Rulemakings Notices Final Rules http://phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/regs/advisory-bulletin Rulemakings http://phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/regs Notices http://phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/regs/notices Final Rules http://phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/regs/rulemaking/final Regulatory Agenda http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain