In
December 2011, the Texas Railroad Commission (TRRC) held workshops in Austin,
Texas to open discussions within the various stakeholder audiences regarding
clarifications as well as edits to the current regulations. Below is a brief
synopsis of some of the issues discussed at TRRC’s Damage Prevention Workshop
on December 6th. If you feel the need to comment on specific issues, direct
your inquiries to David Ferguson at the Texas Railroad
Commission.
Sec. 18.1:
- Excavation Depth – Considering zero depth when utilizing mechanized equipment (except less than 16″ agricultural tillage). General comments were there is confusion when having different depths, which further leads to damages in places such as the service meters. There was a general consensus there should be zero depth, regardless.
- Ticket Size – Discussed limiting the ticket size to one mile maximum per ticket (refresh only yet to be excavated).
- Life of the Locate Ticket – General comments on this issue were regarding a 14-calendar day life of the ticket (refresh if not visible).
- Exemptions – Discussed better defining field boundaries and public access as well as inclusion of interstate pipelines.
Sec. 18.2:
- Tolerance Zone – Reviewed definition and discussed 18″ vs. 24″ area. Suggested using method outlined in CGA Best Practices.
- White Lining – Considering allowing other methods (i.e., electronic white lining) as long as they are agreed to by all parties and documented.
- Underground Pipeline – Clarification may be necessary stating this applies to small diameter lines / distribution lines.
Also discussed the need to add or change definitions for:
Emergency, Life of Locate Ticket and Extraordinary Circumstances.
Sec. 18.3:
- Refresh Ticket – Discussed the need to specify that a refresh ticket is required if locate marks are not visible.
- Ticket Ownership – Discussed issues surrounding ticket ownership (subcontractors working under a general contractor’s locate ticket) and discussed the Commission’s consideration of allowing up to three names listed in existing ticket fields or comments.
Sec. 18.4: 2nd Notice by Excavators – Must call
in 2nd notice if marks can’t be found (as in CGA BP 5-21). The excavator notifies
the operator directly or through the One-Call Center if an underground pipeline
is not found where one has been marked or if an unmarked underground facility
is found, sometimes may be abandoned line not in use.
Sec. 18.5:
- Response Time – Commission is considering adding a positive response time to emergency locate requests. There was discussion regarding the fact that Operators must communicate to Excavator when/how they will respond to the ticket within four hours, which is not a lot of time, considering the One-Call Center 2-hour notification procedures.
- Positive Response – The Commission is considering using the work start date for positive response due date. There was considerable discussion around the fact that positive response due dates create problems for operators because they do not include weekends and holiday exemptions.
- Investigate & Collect Damage Data – The Commission is considering requiring operators to investigate, collect and submit data regarding damages/incidents on all damages with regards to TDRF reporting. The discussion outlined the need for collection of information necessary to complete all pages of TDRF by the due date to the TRRC. There was considerable discussion from operators stating it would be a burden to collect this information on all damages/incidents, as not all incidents require or have investigations conducted.
Sec. 18.6: Combine Markings and Ticket Life –
Currently, markings expire after 14 working days. The discussion is regarding
the life to start at the time the notices are given to the One-Call Center.
Sec. 18.7: Marking Guidelines – Suggested using guidelines similar to
those used by operators, as in CGA BP 7.0, Appendix B.
Sec. 18.8:
- Updating Maps – Discussion regarding requirement for operators to update maps regularly and provide the updated information to the notification centers. Basically considering adding requirement as stated in the Texas Utilities Code (251.107) which requires quarterly updates. The Commission is currently considering this to occur at the time the facility goes active.
- Requirements of 49 CFR 192 and 195 – Currently considering adding wording to the Code that requires operators (and contract locators) to meet the requirements as stated in 49 CFR 192 and 195. There was some confusion as to why this would be added to the Code, as it is already included in the federal regs.
Sec. 18.9: Protocols – Discussion regarding the
combining of portions of Sec. 18.3 and 18.9 pertaining to protocols. Also
discussed adding wording which requires protocols to be adhered to as agreed to
and documented.
Sec. 18.10: Define Excavation Activities w/in Tolerance Zone –
Commission feels there is a need to better define activities such as:
“non-earth materials” (i.e., inclusion of sidewalk as part of the depth);
“tolerance zone area” (include vertical); “movement of earth on the ground or
in the ground” (Rule currently does not define “surface”); and “pavement” (not
only asphalt, but concrete, etc.)
Sec. 18.11:
- Calling 911 – Commission discussed the need for more clarification as to when an excavator should and should not 911. Also discussed was the consideration of parameters for (either) any damage release or certain hazardous conditions (i.e., migration due to soil, pavement, structures, depth, location, etc.).
- TDRF Due Date – Discussed extending the damage reporting due date to 15 days for all. They are also considering 21 or 30 days.
- Damage Notice to Operators – Discussed allowing excavators to contact the operators directly (in addition) to contacting the One-Call Center.
Sec. 18.12: Penalty Guidelines – Commission is considering increasing penalty amounts for frequent repeats. They are also considering allowing training in lieu of penalties.