Common Ground Alliance,

Committee Overview and Update

• Overview
• Introduction
• CGA Overview
• CGA – OCSI
• CGA – Best Practices
• CGA - Regional Partnerships
• CGA – Stakeholder
Advocacy
• National 811 Initiatives
• Introduction
• Executive Director, NC 811
• CGA Member since 2002
• Serving on Best Practices, OCSI
and Stakeholder Advocacy
Committees
• Participant in WRGC since 2003
• Current OCA Board Member
 CGA Overview
• Small staff – a LOT of volunteers
• Member funded + PHMSA grant
• Owners of 811 Trademark
• Facilitators of the national DIRT initiative
• Advocates of damage reduction through
education and distribution of best practices
• Board of Directors oversee direction and strategy
• Committees drive the organization

9/10/2018 Footer Text 4

CGA – Committee Overview
• Committees within OCSI -
• Best Practices
• Education: responsible for 811 coordination
• Technology: VAULT
• Data Committee: responsible for coordination of statistical data and
DIRT data.
• Regional Partnership, Best Practices, Regional Partners, Stakeholder
Advocacy, NTDPC, UPROW (Utility and Public ROW Group)
 • Open to all
stakeholders
• Reports from the CGA
committees
• Most recent meeting
July 19th
• DIRT submissions
encouraged
• Marketing efforts
shared
• Advocacy Committee

http://commongroundalliance.com//map
Click for OCSI summary
Footer Text
 Best Practices Committee Co-Chairs:
Brian Dreesen, USIC
briandreesen@usicinc.com
Mark Newman, TransCanada
9/10/2018 Footer Text mark_newman@transcanada.com9
 How Does This Work?
Proposing a New Practice
To propose a new practice to the Best Practices committee, CGA members
must submit a new practice proposal form. Non-CGA members should
complete a form and contact the CGA office or a CGA member to arrange for
submission to the committee. Often, the committee will require a presentation
by the submitter or a sponsor on the Best Practices Committee.
The new practice proposal form requires submitters to include the following
information:
Purpose: Describe the purpose of the proposed practice.
Origin/Rationale: Briefly describe the origin/rationale behind the practice
proposal. Include any examples of existing practices. (Remember, for a
practice to be considered a "Best Practice," it must already be in practice).
References: Provide references for any existing practices cited in
Origin/Rationale.
How Does This Work?
New practice or modification is proposed using BP Proposal Forms.

Proposal is added to the next Best Practices Meeting Agenda.

Committee reviews the proposal and must reach consensus on moving

forward with the review/investigation process.

If yes to Step 3, the Best Practices Committee assigns a transaction

record (TR) number and forms and ad-hoc committee to further
research the proposal.

Ad-hoc committee further researches the proposal and drafts Best

Practice language.

Draft language is distributed to Best Practice Committee members for

comment at least 30 days prior to the next Best Practices committee
meeting.

Best Practices Committee reviews the proposal at the next

meeting. Each primary member (primary is the member appointed by
a stakeholder group to represent the group on that committee)
obtains feedback from their respective stakeholder group prior to the
meeting.

The committee votes on the proposal; and if the committee reaches

consensus, the new practice is forwarded to the CGA Board of
Directors for final approval.
 TRs approved in 2017
• Best Practices 15.0 -- New Practices and Modifications
• During 2017, the CGA added and amended multiple
practices that appear in Version 15.0. The following
modifications were approved by the Best Practices
Committee and CGA Board in 2017:
• New Practice 3-31, Enhanced Positive Response
• Modification to practice 5-2, White Lining
• A review of all changes to the Best Practices can also
be viewed at http://commongroundalliance.com/best-
practices-guide.

9/10/2018 Footer Text 12

 Enhanced Positive Response

9/10/2018 Footer Text 13

 Enhanced Positive Response (Cont.)

9/10/2018 Footer Text 14

 White Lining Revised

9/10/2018 Footer Text 15

 White Lining Revised (Cont.)

9/10/2018 Footer Text 16

CGA – Best Practices by the numbers

Total number of listed committee

members – 147
Number of One Call stakeholders
listed on committee – 38
Number of Gas
Transmission/distribution and Oil
on committee - 38
Participants in last meeting live or
by phone – +/- 75 (50%)
This is an improvement!
Spring meeting is always packed
due to conference.
Summer meeting has sometimes
struggled.
CGA – Best Practices by the numbers
 CGA Best Practices – Update
Your Primaries
Member Parent Customer (Member) E-mail (Member) CGA Committee Title classification
Johns, Bill Utility Coordinating, INC bjohns@utilicoor.com Primary Engineering/Design
Ferri, Armando NUCA Armando.ferri@zoominternet.net Primary Excavation
Kennedy, George S. NUCA gkennedy@nycap.rr.com Primary Excavation
Bedics, Robert Exelon Corporation rob.bedics@exeloncorp.com Primary Gas Distribution
Lonn, Richard Southern Company rlonn@southernco.com Primary Gas Distribution
Baca, Philip Kinder Morgan philip_baca@kindermorgan.com Primary Gas Transmission
Bradley, Dan NULCA dan@safesitellc.com Primary Locator
Starke, Nick A. UtiliQuest nick.starke@utiliquest.com Primary Locator
Steinberger, Kirk Kinder Morgan kirk_steinberger@kindermorgan.com Primary Oil
Holzer, Jim One Call Concepts, Inc. jimh@occinc.com Primary One Call
Panzer, Louis North Carolina 811, Inc. louis@nc811.org Primary One Call
Lewzader, Michael Association of American Railroads marine6771@msn.com Primary Railroad
Barringer, L. Bradford Retired BRS brsbrad@ctc.net Primary Road Builders
Gray, Allen S. Associated General Contractors of America allen.gray@agc.org Primary Road Builders
Allen, Steve National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives steallen@urc.in.gov Primary State Regulator
Shori, Sunil K. National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives sks@cpuc.ca.gov Primary State Regulator
Wilfong, Tammy L. Verizon tammy.wilfong@verizonbusiness.com Primary Telecommunications

Primaries can vote. Full consensus means one says no it goes back to the task team.
Co-primaries are established to have back up at the meetings.
The CGA Board is working to fill some gaps in the primaries (i.e. electric) and to make
sure there are at least two for each stakeholder.
CGA Best Practices –TRs Under Review
 TR 2013-01 “Mapping Proposed Facilities”

4.22 Marking Newly Installed Facilities

Practice Statement:42
Facility operators ensure that new facilities in areas with continuing excavation activity are marked upon installation to indicate their presence.
Practice Description:
In areas of continuing excavation, newly installed facilities can be damaged and safety can be compromised if the facilities are not marked. Marking facilities upon
installation gives notice to other excavators of the newly installed facilities that may not otherwise be marked in response to a notice of intent to excavate.
TR 2014-02 Cross Bore Determination and Mitigation
TR 2014-02 Cross Bore Determination and Mitigation
(cont.)
TR 2014-04 “Abandoned Lines”
 TR 2017-01 “Modification to Practice 4-5”

BP 4.5 Locator Training

Practice Statement:
Locators are properly trained. Locator training is documented.
Practice Description:
Minimum training guidelines and practices are adopted for locator training. These guidelines and practices include the following:
•Understanding system design/prints/technology
•Understanding construction standards and practices for all types of facilities
•Equipment training and techniques
•Plant recognition training
•Theory of locating
•Daily operations
•Facility owner/excavator relationships and image
•Safety procedures per Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations/federal, state/provincial and local laws
•Written and field testing
•Field training
•Annual retesting
The National Utility Locating Contractors Association (NULCA) Locator Training Standards and Practices2 represent an accepted model within the locate industry.
Documentation of all training is maintained to ensure that facility locators have been properly trained.
TR 2017-02 “Electronically Locatable Lines”
TR 2017-02 “Electronically Locatable Lines”
(cont.)
 TR 2018-01 NEW PROPOSAL
One Call Center informs callers that privately owned utilities/facilities may exist.
 TR 2018-01 NEW PROPOSAL (cont.)
One Call Center informs callers that privately owned utilities/facilities may exist.
 TR 2018-01 NEW PROPOSAL (cont.)
One Call Center informs callers that privately owned utilities/facilities may exist.

9/10/2018 Footer Text 30

How Can YOU Participate?

• Submitting TRs Online

• Responding to TRs that are posted for 30

day review comments
9/10/2018 Footer Text 32
9/10/2018 Footer Text 33
TR 2014-01 - Submitted July 1
Submitter Name (First and Last) Philip Baca
Submitter Email Address philip_baca@kindermorgan(link sends e-mail)
Date of submission UPDATED July 1, 2016
Transaction Record (TR) Number TR2014-01
Is this a modification to an existing practice? No
Is this a proposed new practice? Yes
DISCUSSION - THIS WORDING HAS BEEN POSTED FOR DISCUSSION BUT WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR
APPROVAL AT THE JULY 20 MEETING.
Proposed Practice Statement or Modification
When a facility owner/operator considers it necessary to have a representative on site during excavation
activities to work with the excavator in protecting their existing facilities, the facility owner/operator makes
arrangements with the excavator, within the time specified by state/provincial law to respond to a notice of
intent to excavate, for a representative to be present during excavation activities.
Proposed Practice Description or Modification
The use of a facility owner/operator observer to protect a selected facility helps ensure public/workforce safety,
essential services and the integrity of the facility. This is due to the observer’s access to information and
resources that may not be available to the excavator. This practice should be considered in conjunction with
Section 2-4, Utility Coordination, of the Best Practices Manual.
Proposed References References: North Carolina, Delaware, Florida, Ohio, and California regulations.
Additional comments/notes for committee consideration: Benefit - Enhances safety and reduces risk of damage
to facilities.
- See more at: http://commongroundalliance.com/tr-2014-01-submitted-july-1#sthash.rhCN1dr4.dpuf
CGA Best Practices
36
9/10/2018 Footer Text 37
 CGA Regional Partnerships
• Only 2 conditions:
– Serve ALL Stakeholders
– Share and Promote Best Practices
• Every State Operates Differently
• Regional Coordinators Gone
• Still considered a way to assist with
Stakeholder Advocacy
CGA Stakeholder Advocacy
CGA Stakeholder Advocacy

• Meetings twice a year: once in March and once in November

• Focused on providing tools to states interested in revising
laws
• A collection of documents and case studies are available
online here:
http://commongroundalliance.com/legislativetoolkit

• Most of the time in meetings is spent reviewing state updates

• This committee would be meaningful to you if your state is
undergoing or considering legislative changes
 CGA Supported Initiatives
• DIRT Report being issued in
September
• Big Box Stores promoting 811
9/10/2018 Footer Text 42
 CGA Supported Initiatives
• DIRT Report being issued in
September
• Big Box Stores promoting 811
• Lots of sports events
• COX Balloons on tour
• National 811 survey and 7
individual state findings
 811 Measurement – Who Knows to Call?

• How are we doing?

• What should we be doing differently?
• What programs are effective?
• CGA conducting follow up research with
participating states and splitting the cost
 Some results from National survey

9/10/2018 Footer Text 45

 Some results from National survey

9/10/2018 Footer Text 46

 Some results from National survey

9/10/2018 Footer Text 47

Questions?
Questions?
THANK YOU!