A California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) judge recommended Friday that Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&E) be allowed to increase maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) at its Topock receipt transmission pipeline along the Arizona-California border. The CPUC will take up the recommendation when it meets Oct. 6.

A PG&E spokesperson told NGI that the San Francisco-based combination utility will have to separately ask the CPUC to now allow it to also raise the MAOP on its transmission pipeline (Line 300A and B) running from Topock up to interconnection points with the PG&E transmission backbone system in Northern California. It earlier had been reported that a CPUC hearing last Monday covered Line 300, but it only took up the issue of raising pressure at the receipt point.

CPUC Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Maribeth Bushey concluded that it was safe for the utility to restore the pressure on the Topock receipt line up to 660 psig, its historical operating pressure. PG&E has had the operating pressure lowered on Line 300 and nearly a dozen other pipelines since earlier this year when the CPUC ordered it to do so following investigations of the San Bruno pipeline explosion a year ago.

“Our goal is to restore pressure on our backbone system before demand increases for gas this winter,” the PG&E spokesperson said. “We tested that facility at 1,180 psig and 1,400 psig, and if we followed the state code on this, we were only required to test to 990 psig, so our tests went well above and beyond federal and state requirements.”

He said the testing also provides a tremendous amount of safety on the utility’s pipeline system. ALJ Bushey said the MAOP could be restored on the suction side of the Topock border facilities. Coming out of Topock are actually two transmission pipelines (Line 300 A and B), and a portion of one of the lines was hydrostatically tested successfully on Wednesday, according to PG&E.

“PG&E explained that all segments were successfully tested to pressure above the minimum required to confirm the safe operation of the Topock station,” Bushey wrote in her 11-page proposed decision. She said the CPUC Consumer Protection and Safety Division (CPSD) reviewed the pressure test information provided by the utility.

The ALJ cited a CPSD memo to the utility Sept. 12, citing a number of alleged “deficiencies” in PG&E’s testing protocols and records (see NGI, Sept. 19), but the safety staff had now determined “the tests conducted by PG&E had demonstrated adequate assurance of the fitness for operation of these facilities at the restored [660 psig] MAOP.”

The staff and ALJ proposed decision do not conclude that a so-called spike test should be conducted.

“PG&E has presented complete pressure test results for the 11 segments pressure tested for the suction side of the Topock compressor station that had not been previously tested,” Bushey said. Nevertheless, the CPSD still found some alleged “pressure testing deficiencies,” and the ALJ ordered PG&E to “remedy all deficiencies noted” in the filings for its future MAOP restoration requests.

PG&E said last week news coverage of the testing issue has been “grossly misleading,” asserting that the facts are that the utility has tested the Topock station where Line 300 gathers out-of-state supplies and the tests went “well above and beyond” federal and state requirements. “Federal and state codes required us to pressurize the facilities inside the compressor station to 990 psig; we tested the facility to 1,180 psig and 1,400 psig,” a PG&E spokesperson said.

Elsewhere, other state regulators are scrutinizing gas pipeline operations. The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) held a public meeting in Phoenix last week in its ongoing pipeline proceeding that began last July. At this point the ACC safety staff is proposing amendments to the state’s existing rules governing pipeline safety so Arizona’s approach is consistent with federal regulations, which may change if Congress acts on various pipeline safety bills now being considered (see NGI, Sept.19).

“Staff believes that the proposed amendments will be beneficial to the general public by maintaining the safe operation of pipeline facilities,” ACC staff said in a July 28 filing to the ACC.

Both gas and electric utilities are looking hard at what has come out from the National Transportation Safety Board’s San Bruno report Aug. 30, and from various state commissions. In California, where Sempra Energy and Southwest Gas, along with PG&E were mandated to file implementation plans last month, even major electric utility operators are following the proceedings closely.

As the major shipper and end-user of gas in the state, Southern California Edison Co. (SCE) is trying to determine its exact approach, but it plans to be an active part of the CPUC pipeline proceedings as the proposed cost of the implementation steps could fall heavily on Edison as a major transporter of gas through the Sempra and PG&E pipelines.

“SCE is taking an active interest in the CPUC’s pipeline safety [proceeding],” said an SCE spokesperson. “We are party to the proceeding and are currently reviewing the testimony filed by the four investor-owned utilities [including Sempra’s Southern California Gas Co. and San Diego Gas and Electric Co.].” He outlined two primary concerns of SCE: public safety and customer costs, while noting that utility infrastructure costs, whether for gas or electric operations, are a “high priority.”

Southwest Gas is also looking at its much more extensive pipeline operations in Nevada and Arizona. And in the Pacific Northwest gas utilities are closely monitoring regulatory developments.

A NW Natural spokesperson in Portland, OR, said Oregon’s largest gas distributor and the sole gas provider for the greater Portland metropolitan area expects to have “additional requirements on operators and regulators” over the long term, noting that NW Natural has not had the same level of scrutiny as California pipeline operators.

“We do expect there will be implications to our operations over time; however, we are not in a position to speculate as to what those specific changes will be,” the spokesperson said.

Similarly, a spokesperson for Bellevue, WA-based Puget Sound Energy did not give any specific changes that are under way but did acknowledge that “all pipeline operators and regulators are learning from the San Bruno incident and investigation,” and that the learning includes examining their own pipeline integrity management programs.

©Copyright 2011Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. The preceding news reportmay not be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, in anyform, without prior written consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.