Public Awareness and Pipeline Safety

1
Public Awareness andPipeline Safety

• BC Oil Gas Symposium
• February 27, 2007
• Dan Kirschner
• Executive Director

2
5335 SW Meadows Rd., 220 Lake Oswego, OR
97035 [phone] www.nwga.org NWGA
Members Avista Corporation Cascade Natural Gas
Co. Intermountain Gas Co. NW Natural Puget Sound
Energy Duke Energy Gas Transmission Terasen
Gas TransCanadas GTN System Williams NW Pipeline
3
Public Awareness and Pipeline Safety

• Publics right to know where pipelines are
• Understand and assess risk
• Partner in safety
• Owners responsibility to operate safely and
  securely
• Ensuring the public has access to appropriate and
  useful information
• How much information is too much?

4
A Little History

• June, 1999 Bellingham, WA petroleum pipeline
  explosion kills three young people, June 1999
• August, 2000 Carlsbad, NM natural gas pipeline
  explosion kills twelve people
• September 11, 2001
• December, 2002 Pipeline Safety Improvement Act
  signed requiring Public Awareness efforts

5
Public Awareness Drivers

• Enlightened Self-Interest
• Improved Pipeline Safety
• Enhanced Damage Prevention
• Effective Emergency Response
• Emergency Contacts
• Federal mandate 02 Pipeline Safety Improvement
  Act
• OPS incorporated API RP 1162 in 49 CFR Parts 192
  and 195
• RP 1162 a set of guidelines/best practices for
  Public Awareness programs developed by
• Industry representatives
• Office of Pipeline Safety
• National Assn. of Pipeline Safety Representatives
  
• Public stakeholders

6
Establishing a Baseline

• WUTC-commissioned research questions
• What do people who live along pipelines NEED to
  know?
• What do they WANT to know?
• How can we BEST keep them informed?
• Research methodology
• Review existing published data
• Key Leader/Organizational interviews
• Public Opinion Research
• 500 Statewide 400 Pipeline error /- 4.5
• Focus groups

7
WUTC Key Leader Survey

• Includes 31 Interviews
• Elected and state agency officials, local
  governments, operators and advocacy groups
• Weighted toward residents/activists and first
  responders
• Findings
• No clear consensus on how to deliver message.
• Message delivery seems to be disparate,
  uncoordinated, difficult to access
• Local community involvement is paramount
• People should know
• Where it is
• Whats in it
• Who it serves

8
WUTC Stakeholder Survey

• Includes 201 automated phone surveys
• Local governments, contractors, community and
  environmental groups, media
• Findings
• All messages tested important (70) most
  important
• Pipeline location
• How to recognize problems
• What to do when a problem arises
• Including emergencies
• Current processes inadequate to task
• Should utilize radio, TV, Direct Mail

9
WUTC Public Opinion

• They want to know it all
• Emergency plans
• Potential dangers
• Rights of property owners
• Who to contact

10
What they dont know

• More than 60 percent living within 1,000 feet of
  major pipeline knew it
• Only 45 percent said they knew whom to call in a
  pipeline emergency.

11
To be or not to be (aware)

• More likely to strongly agree pipelines essential
• More likely to strongly believe safer than trucks
  barges
• More likely to feel safer living near a pipeline
• More likely to pay attention

12
Key to awareness

• Those aware want to receive information
• Canvassing direct mail preferred
• Those unaware want info available when THEY want
  it

13
Who has the trust?
1 No trust 5great trust
14
WUTC Recommendations

• Cohesive, coordinated message
• Use existing communication channels
• Unite expertise with credibility
• Focus on personal contacts
• One-stop information location
• Common visual tool/branding

15
RP 1162 Principle Objectives

• Make public education and pipeline awareness
  campaigns along pipeline routes more effective by
  standardizing frequency and content
• Provide recommended baseline public awareness
  program and guidance for determining supplemental
  activities
• Provide guidance for evaluating program
  effectiveness and continuous improvement

16
So, Whats the Rub?
17
Making Useful Information Available Without
Comprising Security

• Post Bham, pre 9/11
• NPMS to the web
• WA Pipeline Safety Act calls for creation of
  statewide geospatial (GIS) database
• For first responders/local jurisdictions
• Post 9/11
• Retrench recognition of CEII and securing
  certain information from disclosure
• Present

18
Federal

• PHMSA finalizing process of re-posting NPMS data
  to the web with restrictions
• Data sharing restrictions will be lifted for
  county and local government users
• Nothing will change for Federal users, state
  users, and pipeline operator users

19
Proposed General Public Access

• Public may view NPMS maps for one county per
  session
• Adjacent county pipeline data will be hidden
• Level of detail limited to 124,000
• Certain layers will be removed
• Unusually Sensitive Areas
• Public facilities (schools, nursing homes, etc.)
• Quads and aerial photographs
• Public will not have access to raw (downloadable)
  data

20
(No Transcript)
21
Public users may only view one county at a
time (Shown here Onondanga Co., NY)
22
Public users can zoom to 124,000 scale
23
Publicly Viewable Pipeline Attributes

• Operator ID and name
• System and subsystem name
• Commodity
• Inter/intrastate designation
• Status In service/abandoned/retired

24
Data Sharing Policy

• Retain nondisclosure agreement for state/federal
  officials requesting raw data
• Revise policy for county/local officials
  requesting raw data
• One county only
• No restrictions in sharing the data can display
  data on public web site if desired
• May not make data available for downloading

25
Washington State

• Leader in pipeline safety and public awareness
  efforts
• Bellingham legacy
• Citizens Committee
• Pipeline Safety Trust
• Maps and map images publicly available since 2004
• Maps on the web

26
User interface www.wutc.wa.gov/pipelinemaps
27
County
28
124,000
29
What about the raw data?
State-wide, including

• Attributes
• Diameter
• MaOP
• Pipe wall thickness
• Manufacturer
• Installation date
• Commodity
• Coating
• Seam type
• AND, certain features

30
Disposition of Raw data

• Subject to public disclosure
• An artifact of law not intentional
• Feds dont but cant preempt state
• No other state treats data similarly
• BC, AB carefully managed
• Managing the situation
• Seek voluntary withdrawal of data requests
• Legislation
• Litigation

31
Conclusion

• Striking the right balance
• Public Awareness Is Important
• Investing in
• Informing partners
• First responders
• RoW landowners/residents
• Providing communities with appropriate, useful
  information
• Maps and map images
• Certain information must be secured
• Shared with regulators
• Otherwise shared with discretion and conditionally

32
5335 SW Meadows Rd., 220 Lake Oswego, OR
97035 [phone] www.nwga.org NWGA
Members Avista Corporation Cascade Natural Gas
Co. Intermountain Gas Co. NW Natural Puget Sound
Energy Duke Energy Gas Transmission Terasen
Gas TransCanadas GTN System Williams NW Pipeline