DOT Regulations Feb2013

DOT Pipeline Safety Regulations - Guidelines for
Compliance
Houston, February 11-12, 2013
Organized by
Clarion Technical Conferences
3401 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002, USA
Tel. +1 713 521 5929.
Web: www.clarion.org
and
Tiratsoo Technical
PO Box 21, Beaconsfield, Bucks HP9 1NS, UK
Tel. 44 1494 675139
Web: www.tiratsootechnical.com
Copyright © 2013 Clarion Technical Conferences, George C. Williamson, and

David E. Bull. All rights reserved. This publication may not be reproduced or
stored in any form without permission of the copyright owners. For
information, contact Clarion Technical Conferences.
DOT Pipeline Safety Regulations
Overview and Guidelines for Compliance
February 11-12, 2013
Course Schedule
Day 1 Day 2
8.00 Lectures, workshops 8.00 Lectures, workshops
9.15 Coffee 9.15 Coffee
12.00 Lunch 12.00 Lunch
5.00 End of Day 1 4.45 End of course
Course Program
Schedule
Day 1 8:00-5:00
Day 2 8:00-5:00
DAY 1 morning (8am – noon)
Introduction
Cross-Reference Chart for Gas vs. Liquids Pipeline Regulations
1. Regulatory Overview (DB)

Retroactive Sections, Definitions, Jurisdictional lines
Gas
Key Features of CFR Parts 191 and 192
Determining Jurisdiction
Gas Gathering Lines
Liquids
Key features of CFR Part 195
Navigable Waterways
Breakout Tanks
Pipeline Safety Acts (DB)

Major Legislation Affecting Pipelines
Regulatory Structure (DB)

Agencies and Their Jurisdictions
2. Applicability of the Regulations (DB)
3. Class Locations (DB)

Determining Class Locations, History of Class Locations
4. MAOP, MOP, and OP Determination for Steel Pipelines
DAY 1 afternoon (1-5pm)
5. Operator Qualification
Basic Review of the OQ Rule (GW)
Commercially Available OQ Options for Operators (GW)
Pros/Cons of Internal vs. External OQ (GW)
6. Integrity Management (GW)

Liquids
IM Requirements
HCAs
Gas
IM Requirements
HCAs
IM Reporting Requirements
IM for Distribution Pipelines
DAY 2 morning (8am – noon)
7. Enforcement Process (DB)

Compliance
Basic Record-keeping Requirements
Federal and State Waivers and Interpretations
8. Testing Requirements: New, Replaced or Relocated Pipelines
9. Routine Operation and Maintenance Provisions

Gas
Liquids
10. Common Compliance Requirements for Damage Prevention, Operator Qualification,

Public Safety Awareness, Abnormal Operation, Abandonment, LNG (CFR Part 193)
11. Control Room Management
12. Reporting Requirements (DB)

Reporting Requirements Overview
Filing Reports On-line
Part 191 Reporting–Annual, Incident, Safety Related Condition
Part 192 Gas Integrity Management–Subpart O. Pipeline Integrity Management
Part 193 – key requirements and elements
DAY 2 afternoon (1-5pm)
12. Reporting Requirements – continued (DB)

Part 195 Reporting–Annual, Incident, Safety Related Condition, Other Special
Requirements
Part 199 Annual Drug/Alcohol MIS Report
Special Reporting Requirements–National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS)
ANSI Safety-Related Condition Chart
National Response Center Reporting Form
13. Regulatory Update – New Rulemakings, Notices, and Advisory Bulletins (DB)
2011 Advisory Bulletins
Rural Liquids Gathering Lines, Low-Stress Lines
Other Updates
14. Interpretations and notes (DB)

15. Reference Documents, Glossary and Acronyms
Gas Leakage Control Guidelines
Glossary
Acronyms
16. Pipeline Safety Laws (DB)

Background
History and Evolution of Pipeline Safety Laws
Surface Transportation and Rail Security Act of 2007
Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006
CFR 49-601: Pipeline Safety - as Amended by the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act
of 2002
Quiz
Instructors
David E. Bull, ARM, is well known throughout the gas industry for outstanding training
programs, development of the odorization audit and expertise in regulatory compliance and
evaluating damage prevention programs. His experience includes risk assessments for over 75 gas
utilities for AEGIS Insurance Services, membership on the Damage Prevention Quality Action
Team (Dig Safely) and as a staff member at the Transportation Safety Institute, Pipeline Division.
David has over 28 years experience helping pipeline operators to assess and manage their risk and
liability exposures. David is also a principal in ViaData LP, publishers of WinD.O.T., The
Pipeline Safety Encyclopedia.
George Williamson has 25 years of Operations, Maintenance and Integrity Management

experience. He is a registered professional engineer, NACE certified corrosion and a cathodic
protection specialist. He has managed compliance and integrity programs for production
facilities, gathering systems, liquid and gas transmission pipelines.
11/3/2011
DOT Pipeline
Safety Regulations
Overview and Guidelines

for Compliance
Clarion Technical
Conferences
Instructors
George Williamson, P.E.
David Bull, ViaData LP
1
11/3/2011
Great Expectations
Did you bring a question to the course?

What is it?
Burning Issues
Questions that can’t be answered

quickly or within the context of this
program will be researched and the
answer provided the next day or via e-
mail.
2
11/3/2011
Menu
1 Regulatory Overview 9 Routine Operations &
- Retroactive Sections, Definitions, Maintenance
Jurisdictional lines - Part 192
- Gas - Part 195
- Liquids
10 Common Requirements
- Pipeline Safety Act
Damage Prevention, Public
- Pipeline Regulatory Structure
Safety Awareness, Abnormal
2 Applicability Ops., Abandonment, LNG Part
3 Determining Class Location 193
4 MAOP Steel Pipelines 11 Control Room Management
5 OQ 12 Reporting
6 Integrity Management 13 DIMP
7 Enforcement Process 14 Regulatory Update
8 Testing - Low stress new MAOP
- Other
3

Code of Federal Regulations Parts 190 ‐195

The links below will direct you to the official US government websites that contain the text of the
regulations applicable to gas pipeline systems. Important note: always refer to the electronic
version for the latest versions of the Code. The PDF versions will not always reflect the most recent
changes to the regulations.

190 electronic version 193 electronic version
190 PDF 193 PDF

191 PDF 194 PDF

192 pdf 195 PDF

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

49 CFR 191, Gas Pipeline Regulations 49 CFR 195, Liquid Pipeline Regulations
Part 191 - Reports Subpart B--Annual, Accident, and Safety-
Related Condition Reporting
191.1 Scope. §195.0 Scope.1
§195.1 Applicability. 2
191.3 Definitions. §195.2 Definitions.3
191.5 Telephonic notice of certain incidents. §195.48 Scope.
§195.50 Reporting accidents.
§195.52 Telephonic notice of certain accidents.
191.7 Addressee for written reports. §195.58 Addressee for written reports.
191.9 Distribution system: Incident report.
191.11 Distribution system: Annual report.
191.13 Distribution systems reporting transmission
pipelines; transmission or gathering systems
reporting distribution
191.15 Transmission and gathering systems: §195.54 Accident reports.
Incident report.
191.17 Transmission and gathering systems: §195.49 Annual report
Annual report.
191.19 Report forms. §195.62 Supplies of accident report DOT Form
7000-1.
191.21 OMB control number assigned to §195.63 OMB control number assigned to
information collection. information collection.
191.23 Reporting safety-related conditions. §195.55 Reporting safety-related conditions.
191.25 Filing safety-related condition reports. §195.56 Filing safety-related condition reports.
191.27 Filing offshore pipeline condition reports. §195.57 Filing offshore pipeline condition reports.
§195.60 Operator assistance in investigation.
Subpart A - General: Subpart A--General
§192.1 What is the scope of this part? §195.0 Scope.
§195.1 Applicability.
§192.3 Definitions §195.2 Definitions.
§195.4 Compatibility necessary for transportation
of hazardous liquids or carbon dioxide.
§192.5 Class locations §195.210 Pipeline location.4
§195.6 Unusually Sensitive Areas (USAs)
§192.7 What documents are incorporated by §195.3 Matter incorporated by reference in whole
reference partly or wholly in this part? or in part
1
Located in 49 CFR 195Subpart A
2
3
4
Located in 49 CFR 195 Subpart C

Subpart A - General: Subpart A--General
§195.8 Transportation of hazardous liquid or
carbon dioxide in pipelines constructed with other
than steel pipe.
§192.8 How are onshore gathering lines and § 195.11 What is a regulated rural gathering line
regulated onshore gathering lines determined? and what requirements apply?
§192.9 What requirements apply to gathering § 195.11 What is a regulated rural gathering line
lines? and what requirements apply?
§ 195.12 What requirements apply to low-stress
pipelines in rural areas?
§192.10 Outer continental shelf pipelines §195.9 Outer continental shelf pipelines.
§195.10 Responsibility of operator for compliance
with this part.
§192.11 Petroleum gas systems
§192.13 What general requirements apply to §195.401 General requirements.5
pipelines regulated under this part?
§192.14 Conversion to service subject to this part §195.5 Conversion to service subject to this part.
§192.15 Rules of regulatory construction
§192.16 Customer notification.
§192.17 [Reserved]
SubPart B - Materials Subpart C--Design Requirements
§192.51 Scope §195.100 Scope.
§192.53 General
§192.55 Steel pipe §195.112 New pipe.
§195.114 Used pipe.
§192.57 [Reserved]
§192.59 Plastic pipe
§192.61 [Reserved]
§192.63 Marking of materials. §195.112 New pipe.6
§195.118 Fittings.
§192.65 Transportation of pipe.
SubPart C - Pipe Design Subpart C--Design Requirements
§192.101 Scope. §195.100 Scope.
§192.103 General. §195.108 External pressure.
§195.110 External loads.
§192.105 Design formula for steel pipe. §195.106 Internal design pressure.
5
Located in 49 CFR 195 Subpart F
6
Code sections located in 49 CFR 195 Subpart C

SubPart C - Pipe Design Subpart C--Design Requirements
§192.107 Yield strength (S) for steel pipe.
§192.109 Nominal wall thickness (t) for steel pipe.
§192.111 Design factor (F) for steel pipe. §195.106 Internal design pressure.
§195.111 Fracture propagation.
§192.112 Additional design requirements for steel
pipe using alternative maximum allowable
operating pressure.
§192.113 Longitudinal joint factor (E) for steel §195.106 Internal design pressure.
pipe.
§192.115 Temperature derating factor (T) for steel §195.102 Design temperature.
pipe.
§192.117 [Reserved]
§192.119 [Reserved]
§192.121 Design of plastic pipe.
§192.123 Design limitations for plastic pipe.
§192.125 Design of copper pipe.
SubPart D - Design of Pipeline Components Subpart C--Design Requirements
§195.132 Aboveground breakout tank.
§195.134 CPM leak detection.
§192.141 Scope. §195.100 Scope.7
§192.143 General requirements.
§192.144 Qualifying metallic components. §195.101 Qualifying metallic components other
than pipe.
§192.145 Valves. §195.116 Valves.
§192.147 Flanges and flange accessories. §195.126 Flange connection.
§192.149 Standard fittings. §195.118 Fittings.
§192.150 Passage of internal inspection devices. §195.120 Passage of internal inspection devices.
§192.151 Tapping.
§192.153 Components fabricated by welding. §195.124 Closures.
§195.130 Fabricated assemblies.
§192.155 Welded branch connections. §195.122 Fabricated branch connections.
§192.157 Extruded outlets.
§192.159 Flexibility. §195.110 External loads.
§192.161 Supports and anchors. §195.208 Welding of supports and braces.8
§195.128 Station piping.
§192.163 Compressor stations: Design and §195.262 Pumping equipment. 9
construction.
7
Located in 49 CFR 195 Subpart C
8
Located in 49 CFR 195 Subpart D
9

SubPart D - Design of Pipeline Components Subpart C--Design Requirements
§192.165 Compressor stations: Liquid removal.
§192.167 Compressor stations: Emergency §195.262 Pumping equipment. 10
shutdown.
§192.169 Compressor stations: Pressure limiting §195.262 Pumping equipment. 11
devices.
§192.171 Compressor stations: Additional safety §195.262 Pumping equipment. 12
equipment.
§192.173 Compressor stations: Ventilation. §195.262 Pumping equipment. 1314
§192.175 Pipe-type and bottle-type holders.
§192.177 Additional provisions for bottle-type
holders.
§192.179 Transmission line valves. §195.258 Valves: General.
§195.260 Valves: Location. 15
§192.181 Distribution line valves.
§192.183 Vaults: Structural design requirements.
§192.185 Vaults: Accessibility.
§192.187 Vaults: Sealing, venting, and ventilation.
§192.189 Vaults: Drainage and waterproofing.
§192.191 Design pressure of plastic fittings.
§192.193 Valve installation in plastic pipe.
§192.195 Protection against accidental §195.104 Variations in pressure.
overpressuring.
§192.197 Control of the pressure of gas delivered
from high-pressure distribution systems.
§192.199 Requirements for design of pressure
relief and limiting devices.
§192.201 Required capacity of pressure relieving
and limiting stations.
§192.203 Instrument, control, and sampling pipe
and components.
SubPart E - Welding of Steel in Pipelines Subpart D--Construction
§192.221 Scope.
§192.223 [Removed]
§192.225 Welding Procedures §195.214 Welding procedures
10
11
12
13
14
15

SubPart E - Welding of Steel in Pipelines Subpart D--Construction
§192.227 Qualification of welders. §195.222 Welders: Qualification of welders.
§192.229 Limitations on welders. §195.222 Welders: Qualification of welders.
§192.231 Protection from weather. §195.224 Welding: Weather.
§192.233 Miter joints. §195.216 Welding: Miter joints.
§192.235 Preparation for welding.
§192.237 [Removed]
§192.239 [Removed].
§192.241 Inspection and test of welds. §195.228 Welds and welding inspection:
Standards of acceptability.
§192.243 Nondestructive testing. §195.234 Welds: Nondestructive testing.
§192.245 Repair or removal of defects. §195.230 Welds: Repair or removal of defects.
SubPart F - Joining of Materials Other Than by
Welding
§192.271 Scope.
§192.273 G General.
§192.275 Cast iron pipe.
§192.277 Ductile iron pipe.
§192.279 G Copper pipe.
§192.281 G Plastic pipe.
§192.283 G Plastic pipe: Qualifying joining
procedures
§192.285 G Plastic pipe; qualifying persons to
make joints.
§192.287 Plastic pipe; inspection of joints.
SubPart G - General Construction Subpart D--Construction
Requirements for Transmission Lines and
Mains
§195.205 Repair, alteration and reconstruction of
aboveground breakout tanks that have been in
service.
§195.264 Aboveground breakout tanks.
§195.266 Construction records.
§192.301 Scope. §195.200 Scope.
§192.303 Compliance with specifications or §195.202 Compliance with specifications or
standards. standards.
§192.305 Inspection: General. §195.204 Inspection - General.
§192.307 Inspection of materials. §195.206 Material inspection.
§192.309 Repair of steel pipe. §195.226 Welding: Arc burns.
§192.311 Repair of plastic pipe.

SubPart G - General Construction Subpart D--Construction
Requirements for Transmission Lines and
Mains
§192.313 Bends and elbows. §195.212 Bending of pipe.
§192.315 Wrinkle bends in steel pipe. §195.212 Bending of pipe.
§192.317 Protection from hazards.
§195.254 Above ground components.
§195.256 Crossing of railroads and highways.
§192.319 Installation of pipe in a ditch §195.246 Installation of pipe in a ditch.
§195.252 Backfilling.
§192.321 Installation of plastic pipe.
§192.323 Casing.
§192.325 Underground clearance. §195.250 Clearance between pipe and
underground structures.
§192.327 Cover. §195.248 Cover over buried pipeline.
§192.328 Additional construction requirements for
steel pipe using alternative maximum allowable
operating pressure
SubPart H - Customer Meters, Service
Regulators, and Service Lines
§192.351 Scope.
§192.353 Customer meters and regulators:
Location.
Protection from damage.
Installation.
§192.359 Customer meter installations: Operating
pressure.
§192.361 Service lines: Installation.
§192.363 Service lines: Valve Requirements.
§192.365 Service lines: Location of valves.
§192.367 Service lines: General requirements for
connections to main piping.
§192.369 Service lines: Connections to cast iron
or ductile iron mains.
§192.371 Service lines: Steel.
§192.373 Service lines: Cast iron and ductile iron.
§192.375 Service lines: Plastic.
§192.377 Service lines: Copper
§192.379 New service lines not in use.

SubPart H - Customer Meters, Service
Regulators, and Service Lines
§192.381 Service Lines: Excess flow valve
performance standards
§192.383 Excess flow valve customer notification
SubPart I - Requirements for Corrosion Subpart H--Corrosion Control
Control
§192.451 Scope. §195.551 What do the regulations in this subpart
cover?
§195.553 What special definitions apply to this
subpart?
§192.452 How does this subpart apply to §195.557 Which pipelines must have coating for
converted pipelines and regulated onshore external corrosion control?
gathering lines?
§192.453 General. §195.555 What are the qualifications for
supervisors?
§192.455 External corrosion control: Buried or §195.557 Which pipelines must have coating for
submerged pipelines installed after July 31, 1971. external corrosion control?
§195.563 Which pipelines must have cathodic
protection?
§192.457 External corrosion control: Buried or §195.557 Which pipelines must have coating for
submerged pipelines installed before August 1, external corrosion control?
1971. §195.563 Which pipelines must have cathodic
protection?
§192.459 External corrosion control: §195.569 Do I have to examine exposed portions
Examination of buried pipeline when exposed. of buried pipelines?
§192.461 External corrosion control: Protective §195.559 What coating material may I use for
coating. external corrosion control?
§195.561 When must I inspect pipe coating used
for external corrosion control?
§195.565 How do I install cathodic protection on
breakout tanks?
§192.463 External corrosion control: Cathodic §195.571 What criteria must I use to determine
protection. the adequacy of cathodic protection?
§192.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring. §195.573 What must I do to monitor external
corrosion control?
§192.467 External corrosion control: Electrical §195.575 Which facilities must I electrically
isolation. isolate and what inspections, tests, and safeguards
are required?
§192.469 External corrosion control: Test §195.567 Which pipelines must have test leads
stations. and what must I do to install and maintain the
leads?

SubPart I - Requirements for Corrosion Subpart H--Corrosion Control
Control
§192.471 External corrosion control: Test leads. §195.567 Which pipelines must have test leads
and what must I do to install and maintain the
leads?
§192.473 External corrosion control: Interference §195.577 What must I do to alleviate interference
currents. currents?
§192.475 Internal corrosion control: General. §195.579 What must I do to mitigate internal
corrosion?
§192.476 Internal corrosion control: Design and §195.579 What must I do to mitigate internal
construction of transmission line. corrosion?
§192.477 Internal corrosion control: Monitoring. §195.579 What must I do to mitigate internal
corrosion?
§192.479 Atmospheric corrosion control; §195.581 Which pipelines must I protect against
General. atmospheric corrosion and what coating material
may I use?
§192.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: §195.583 What must I do to monitor atmospheric
Monitoring. corrosion control?
§192.483 Remedial measures: General. §195.585 What must I do to correct corroded
pipe?
§192.485 Remedial measures: Transmission lines. §195.585 What must I do to correct corroded
pipe?
§195.587 What methods are available to
determine the strength of corroded pipe?
§192.487 Remedial measures: Distribution lines
other than cast iron or ductile iron lines.
§192.489 Remedial measures: Cast iron and
ductile iron pipelines.
§192.490 Direct assessment. § 195.588 What standards apply to direct
assessment?
§192.491 Corrosion control records. §195.589 What corrosion control information do I
have to maintain?
SubPart J - Test Requirements Subpart E--Pressure Testing
§192.501 Scope. §195.300 Scope.
§192.503 General requirements. §195.302 General requirements.
§195.306 Test medium.
§195.308 Testing of tie-ins.
§195.303 Risk-based alternative to pressure
testing older hazardous liquid and carbon dioxide
pipelines.
§195.304 Test pressure.

SubPart J - Test Requirements Subpart E--Pressure Testing
§192.505 Strength test requirements for steel §195.305 Testing of components.
pipeline to operate at a hoop stress of 30 percent
or more of SMYS.
§195.307 Pressure testing aboveground breakout
tanks.
§192.507 Test requirements for pipelines to
operate at a hoop stress less than 30 percent of
SMYS and at or above 100 psig.
§192.509 Test requirements for pipelines to
operate below 100 psig.
§192.511 Test requirements for service lines.
§192.513 Test requirements for plastic pipelines.
§192.515 Environmental protection and safety
requirements.
§192.517 Records. §195.310 Records.
SubPart K- Uprating
§192.551 Scope.
§192.553 General requirements.
§192.555 Uprating to a pressure that will produce
a hoop stress of 30 percent or more of SMYS in
steel pipelines.
§192.557 Uprating: Steel pipelines to a pressure
that will produce a hoop stress less than 30 percent
of SMYS: (plastic, iron, and ductile iron pipelines)
SubPart L - Operations Subpart F--Operation and Maintenance
§192.601 Scope. §195.400 Scope.
§192.603 General provisions. §195.401 General requirements.
§195.402 Procedural manual for operations,
maintenance, and emergencies.
§195.404 Maps and Records.
§192.605 Procedural manual for operations, §195.402 Procedural manual for operations,
maintenance, and emergencies maintenance, and emergencies.
§195.405 Protection against ignitions and safe
access/egress involving floating roofs.
§192.607 Initial determination of class location
and confirmation or establishment of maximum
allowable operating pressure.
§192.609 Change in class location: Required
study.

SubPart L - Operations Subpart F--Operation and Maintenance
§192.611 Change in class location: Confirmation
or revision of maximum allowable operating
pressure.
§192.612 Underwater inspection and reburial of §195.413 Underwater inspection and reburial of
pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico and its inlets. pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico and its inlets.
§192.613 Continuing Surveillance.
§192.614 Damage prevention program. §195.442 Damage Prevention Program
§192.615 Emergency plans. §195.402 Procedural manual for operations,
maintenance, and emergencies.
§195.403 Emergency Response Training.
§192.616 Public Awareness §195.440 Public awareness
§192.617 Investigation of failures.
§192.619 What is the maximum allowable §195.304 Test pressure.
operating pressure for steel or plastic pipelines? §195.406 Maximum operating pressure.
§195.444 CPM leak detection.
§192.620 Alternative maximum allowable
operating pressure for certain steel pipelines
§192.621 Maximum allowable operating
pressure: High-Pressure distribution systems.
§192.623 Maximum and minimum allowable
operating pressure:
§192.625 Odorization of gas.
§192.627 Tapping pipelines under pressure.
§192.629 Purging of pipelines.
SubPart M - Maintenance Subpart F--Operation and Maintenance
§192.701 Scope. §195.400 Scope.
§192.703 General. §195.401 General requirements.
§192.705 Transmission lines: Patrolling. §195.412 Inspection of rights-of-way and
crossings under navigable waters.
§192.706 Transmission lines: Leakage surveys.
§192.707 Line markers for mains and §195.410 Line markers.
transmission lines. §195.434 Signs.
§192.709 Transmission lines: Record keeping. §195.404 Maps and Records.
§192.711 Transmission lines: General §195.422 Pipeline Repairs.
requirements for repair procedures.
§192.713 Transmission lines: Permanent field §195.422 Pipeline Repairs.
repair of imperfections and damages.
repair of welds.
repair of leaks.

SubPart M - Maintenance Subpart F--Operation and Maintenance
§192.719 Transmission lines: Testing of repairs. §195.422 Pipeline Repairs.
§195.424 Pipe movement.
§195.426 Scraper and sphere facilities.
§195.430 Firefighting equipment.
§195.432 Breakout tanks.
§195.436 Security of facilities.
§192.721 Distribution systems: Patrolling.
§192.723 Distribution systems: Leakage surveys.
§192.725 Test requirements for reinstating service
lines.
§192.727 Abandonment or deactivation of § 195.59 Abandonment or deactivation of
facilities. facilities.16
§192.729 [Removed]
§192.731 Compressor stations: Inspection and
testing of relief devices.
§192.733 [Removed]
§192.735 Compressor stations: Storage of
combustible materials.
§192.736 Compressor stations: Gas detection.
§192.737 [Removed]
§192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating §195.428 Overpressure safety devices and
stations: Inspection and testing. overfill protection systems
§192.741 Pressure limiting and regulating §195.408 Communications.
stations: Telemetering or recording gages.
§192.743 Pressure limiting and regulating §195.428 Overpressure safety devices and
stations: Capacity of relief devices. overfill protection systems
§192.745 Valve maintenance: Transmission §195.420 Valve maintenance.
lines.
§192.747 Valve maintenance: Distribution
systems.
§192.749 Vault maintenance.
§192.751 Prevention of accidental ignition. §195.438 Smoking or open flames.
§192.753 Caulked bell and spigot joints.
§192.755 Protecting cast-iron pipelines.
§192.761 High Consequence Areas. Definitions.
SubPart N. Qualification of Pipeline Personnel Subpart G--Operator Qualification
§192.801 Scope §195.501 Scope.
§192.803 Definitions §195.503 Definitions.
§192.805 Qualification Program §195.505 Qualification program.
16
Located in 49 CFR Subpart B

SubPart N. Qualification of Pipeline Personnel Subpart G--Operator Qualification
§192.807 Recordkeeping §195.507 Recordkeeping.
§192.809 General §195.509 General.
Subpart O--Gas Transmission Pipeline Subpart F--Operation and Maintenance
Integrity Management
§195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high
consequence areas.
192.901 What do the regulations in this subpart §195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high
cover? consequence areas.
192.903 What definitions apply to this subpart? §195.450 High Consequence Areas - Definitions
192.905 How does an operator identify a high §195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high
consequence area? consequence areas.
192.907 What must an operator do to implement §195.452
this subpart?
192.909 How can an operator change its integrity §195.452
management program?
192.911 What are the elements of an integrity §195.452
management program?
192.913 When may an operator deviate its §195.452
program from certain requirements of this
subpart?
192.915 What knowledge and training must §195.452
personnel have to carry out an integrity
management program?
192.917 How does an operator identify potential §195.452
threats to pipeline integrity and use the threat
identification in its integrity program?
192.919 What must be in the baseline assessment §195.452
plan?
192.921 How is the baseline assessment to be §195.452
conducted?
192.923 How is direct assessment used and for §195.452
what threats?
192.925 What are the requirements for using §195.452
External Corrosion Direct Assessment (ECDA)?
Internal Corrosion Direct Assessment (ICDA)?
Direct Assessment for Stress Corrosion Cracking
(SCCDA)?
192.931 How may Confirmatory Direct §195.452
Assessment (CDA) be used?

Subpart O--Gas Transmission Pipeline Subpart F--Operation and Maintenance
192.933 What actions must be taken to address §195.452
integrity issues?
192.935 What additional preventive and §195.452
mitigative measures must an operator take?
192.937 What is a continual process of evaluation §195.452
and assessment to maintain a pipeline's integrity?
192.939 What are the required reassessment §195.452
intervals?
192.941 What is a low stress reassessment? §195.452
192.943 When can an operator deviate from these §195.452
reassessment intervals?
192.945 What methods must an operator use to §195.452
measure program effectiveness?
192.947 What records must an operator keep? §195.452
192.949 How does an operator notify PHMSA? §195.452
192.951 Where does an operator file a report? §195.452
Appendices Appendices
Appendix A Delineation Between Federal and
State Jurisdiction
Appendix B-Risk-Based Alternative to Pressure
Testing Older Hazardous Liquid and Carbon
Dioxide Pipelines Risk-Based Alternative
Appendix A - Reserved
Appendix B - Qualification of Pipe
Appendix C - Qualification of Welders for Low
Stress Level Pipe
Appendix D - Criteria for Cathodic Protection and
Determination of Measurements
Appendix E to Part 192--Guidance on Appendix C to Part 195-Guidance for
Determining High Consequence Areas and on Implementation of Integrity Management Program
Carrying Out Requirements in the Integrity
Management Rule
Regulatory Overview
Retroactive sections, Definitions,
and Jurisdictional Lines
Rules of regulatory
construction from Part 192
(a) As used in this part:
"Includes" means "including but not limited to."
"May" means "is permitted to" or "is authorized to."
"May not" means "is not permitted to" or "is not authorized
to."
"Shall" is used in the mandatory and imperative sense.
(b) In this part:
(1) Words importing the singular include the plural;
(2) Words importing the plural include the singular; and,
(3) Words importing the masculine gender include the
feminine.
1
Grammar
“And” means that paragraph and other
paragraph(s) at the same level are to
be considered all together.
“Or” indicates any of several options,
choices, or conditions
AND
(d) The operator's program must specifically include
provisions to educate the public, appropriate
government organizations, and persons engaged in
excavation related activities on:
(1) Use of a one-call notification system prior to excavation
and other damage prevention activities;
(2) Possible hazards associated with unintended releases
from a gas pipeline facility;
(3) Physical indications that such a release may have
occurred;
(4) Steps that should be taken for public safety in the event
of a gas pipeline release; and
(5) Procedures for reporting such an event.
2
OR
(3) A Class 3 location is:
(i) Any class location unit that has 46 or more
buildings intended for human occupancy; or
(ii) An area where the pipeline lies within 100
yards (91 meters) of either a building or a small,
well-defined outside area (such as a playground,
recreation area, outdoor theater, or other place of
public assembly) that is occupied by 20 or more
persons on at least 5 days a week for 10 weeks in
any 12-month period. (The days and weeks need
not be consecutive.)
49 CFR 191
(a) This part prescribes requirements for the
reporting of incidents, safety-related
conditions, and annual pipeline summary data
by operators of gas pipeline facilities located
in the United States or Puerto Rico, including
pipelines within the limits of the Outer
Continental Shelf as that term is defined in
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act [43
U.S.C. 1331].
3
49 CFR 191 Exemption
(b) This part does not apply to-
…(some offshore pipelines)
(4) Onshore gathering of gas--
(i) Through a pipeline that operates at less than 0
psig (0 kPa);
(ii) Through a pipeline that is not a regulated
onshore gathering line (as determined in § 192.8
of this subchapter); and
(iii) Within inlets of the Gulf of Mexico, except for
the requirements in § 192.612.
Incident
Incident means any of the following events:
(1) An event that involves a release of gas from a pipeline, or of
liquefied natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, refrigerant gas, or
gas from an LNG facility, and that results in one or more of the
following consequences:
(i) A death, or personal injury necessitating in-patient hospitalization;
(ii) Estimated property damage of $50,000 or more, including loss to
the operator and others, or both, but excluding cost of gas lost;
(iii) Unintentional estimated gas loss of three million cubic feet or
more;
(2) An event that results in an emergency shutdown of an LNG
facility. Activation of an emergency shutdown system for reasons
other than an actual emergency does not constitute an incident.
(3) An event that is significant in the judgment of the operator,
even though it did not meet the criteria of paragraphs (1) or (2) of
this definition.
4
§ 191.5 Immediate notice of
certain incidents.
EARLIEST PRACTICABLE MOMENT
following discovery of each incident as
defined in §191.3.
What does this mean??????????? (2 hours)
800-424-8802 (in Washington, DC, 202-
267-2675)
Electronically http://www.nrc.uscg.mil
OPS will assign Incident Number
§191.5 What to report

The following information is required:
(1) Name of operator and person making report
and their telephone numbers.
(2) Incident Location.
(3) Incident Time.
(4) Number of fatalities and personal injuries, if
any.
(5) All other significant facts that are known by the
operator that are relevant to the cause of the
incident or extent of the damages.
5
49 CFR 192
Transportation Of Natural And Other Gas By
Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety Standards
(a) This part prescribes minimum safety
requirements for pipeline facilities and the
transportation of gas including pipeline
facilities and the transportation of gas within
the limits of the outer continental shelf as
that term is defined in the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331).
§§ 192.7 and 195.2

Incorporation by reference
Incorporate by reference all or portions of over 60
consensus standards and specifications for the
design, construction, and operation
American Gas Association (AGA)
American Petroleum Institute (API)
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
ASME International (ASME)
Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and
Fittings Industry, Inc. (MSS)
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
Plastics Pipe Institute, Inc. (PPI)
NACE International (NACE)
Gas Technology Institute (GTI)
6
Incorporation by Reference
(IBR)
Operators must use the current documents
IBR for design, operations or maintenance.
IBR is not retroactive, unless system is
“replaced, relocated, or otherwise changed.”
OPS interpretation 192.3, April 5, 1993.
You also asked if a regulator station, installed prior to 1970, would continue to
be "grandfathered" if a pressure recording gauge is installed or if overpressure
protection, such as a relief valve or monitor regulator, is installed. From your
questions, I believe you are concerned whether the grandfather status of an
entire regulator station would be altered if the changes you cite are made. As
provided by §192.13(b), the grandfathered equipment that is not replaced,
relocated, or otherwise changed would retain its grandfather status. The new
equipment you install would be required to conform to the safety regulations to
the extent required by §192.13(a).
Subparts in 49 CFR 192

Subpart A 1-16 General
SubPart B 51-65 Materials
SubPart C 101-125 Pipe Design
SubPart D 141-203 Design of Pipeline
Components
SubPart E 221-245 Welding of Steel in
Pipelines
SubPart F 271-287 Joining of
Materials Other Than by Welding
7
SubPart G 301-327 General
Construction Requirements for Transmission
Lines and Mains
SubPart H 351-383 Customer Meters,
Service Regulators, and Service Lines
SubPart I 451-491 Requirements for
Corrosion Control
SubPart J 501-517 Test Requirements
SubPart K 551-557 Uprating

SubPart L 601-629 Operations
SubPart M 701-761 Maintenance
SubPart N 801-809 Qualification of
Pipeline Personnel
Subpart O 901-951 Pipeline
Subpart P 1001-1015 Distribution
Integrity Management Program. (DIMP)
8
Appendix A Reserved
Appendix B Qualification of Pipe
Appendix C Qualification of Welders
for Low Stress Level Pipe
Appendix D Criteria for Cathodic
Protection and Determination of
Measurements
Appendix E Guidance on
Determining High Consequence Areas and on
Carrying Out Requirements in the Integrity
Management Rule
Retroactive Subparts
Retroactive subparts apply to the pipeline
regardless of when it was built.
OPS interpretation, 192.13, June 20, 1979
Question 1. Are pipelines that were in existence
before the effective date of this act subject to the
maintenance, repair, and operations requirements
of Section 192?
Answer 1. On November 12, 1970, the
maintenance, repair, and operations requirements
of Part 192 became effective with regard to all
new and then existing gas pipelines in or affecting
interstate commerce. (35 FR 13257)
9
49 CFR 192
Subpart A – General
November, 12, 1970, §192.13(b) No person may operate
segment of pipeline …
unless that replacement, relocation, or change has been made
in accordance with this part.
March 12, 1971, §192.13(a) (1) No person may operate
segment of pipeline …
The pipeline has been designed, installed, constructed; initially
inspected, and initially tested in accordance with this part;
July 31, 1977, §192.13(a)(b) applies to offshore gathering
lines
192.13 (c) Each operator shall maintain, modify as
appropriate, and follow the plans, procedures, and programs
that it is required to establish under this part.
Added dates for gathering in 2006
49 CFR 192
Subpart I – Corrosion
July 31, 1971, § 192.455
August 1, 1971, § 192.457
Subpart K – Uprating
Subpart L – Operations
Subpart M – Maintenance
Subpart O – Integrity Management
Subpart P – Distribution Integrity Management
Remember A M I L K O P! KOMPLAI
KOMPLAIN
10
Definitions
Key definitions for operators of
gas or LNG pipelines
Inspection Intervals
at intervals not exceeding 15 months,
but at least once each calendar year
at intervals not exceeding 7 1/2
months, but at least twice each
calendar year
at intervals not exceeding 4 1/2
months, but at least four times each
calendar year
11
Once Each Calendar Year,
NTE 15 Months
Jun Jul Aug Sep
Oct Nov Dec Jan
Feb Mar Apr May
Jun Jul Aug Sep
Oct Nov Dec Jan
Feb Mar Apr May
Once Each Calendar Year,

NTE 15 Months ?????
Jun Jul Aug Sep
Oct Nov Dec Jan
Feb Mar Apr May
Jun Jul Aug Sep
Oct Nov Dec Jan
Feb Mar Apr May
12
2 Times per Calendar Year,
NTE 7-1/2 Months
Jun Jul Aug Sep
Oct Nov Dec Jan
Feb Mar Apr May
Jun Jul Aug Sep
Oct Nov Dec Jan

Feb Mar Apr May
Abandoned
"Abandoned" means permanently
removed from service.
13
§192.727 Abandonment or
inactivation of facilities.
To abandon
Disconnect from all sources of gas
Purge and ensure no combustible mixture remains
Seal at the ends (and other openings)
Except for services, inactive pipelines not
being maintained in accordance with Part 192
must be disconnected, purged and sealed.
When service to a customer is
discontinued, do one of the following
Lock valve
Install mechanical device or fitting in
service or meter to prevent flow of gas
Disconnect customer’s piping from gas
supply and seal open ends
Part 195 – Procedures in O&M for
Abandonment of facilities, purging, sealing
14
Active corrosion
“Active corrosion” means continuing
corrosion which, unless controlled,
could result in a condition that is
detrimental to public safety or the
environment
Administrator
"Administrator" means the
Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Administration or his or her
delegate.
15
Alarm
“Alarm” means an audible or visible
means of indicating to the controller
that equipment or processes are outside
operator-defined, safety-related
parameters.
Control room
“Control room” means an operations
center staffed by personnel charged
with the responsibility for remotely
monitoring and controlling a pipeline
facility.
16
Controller
“Controller” means a qualified individual
who remotely monitors and controls the
safety-related operations of a pipeline
facility via a SCADA system from a
control room, and who has operational
authority and accountability for the
remote operational functions of the
pipeline facility.
Customer Meter
"Customer meter" means the meter that
measures the transfer of gas from an
operator to a consumer.
17
Distribution Line
"Distribution Line" means a pipeline
other than a gathering or transmission
line.
Electrical survey
“Electrical survey” means a series of
closely spaced pipe-to-soil readings
over pipelines which are subsequently
analyzed to identify locations where a
corrosive current is leaving the pipeline.
18
Exposed underwater pipeline
“Exposed underwater pipeline” means
an underwater pipeline where the top
of the pipe protrudes above the
underwater natural bottom (as
determined by recognized and generally
accepted practices) in waters less than
15 feet (4.6 meters) deep, as measured
from mean low water.
Gas
"Gas" means natural gas, flammable
gas, or gas which is toxic or corrosive
19
Gathering Line
"Gathering Line" means a pipeline that
transports gas from a current
production facility to a transmission line
or main.
New definition discussed under
jurisdictional lines
Line Section
"Line section" means a continuous run
of transmission line between adjacent
compressor stations, between a
compressor station and storage
facilities, between a compressor station
and a block valve, or between adjacent
block valves.
20
Main
"Main" means a distribution line that
serves as a common source of supply
for more than one service line
Maximum Actual Operating

Pressure (MOP)
The maximum pressure that occurs
during normal operations over a period
of 1 year.
(Part 192 definition only)
21
Maximum Allowable Operating
Pressure (MAOP)"
"Maximum allowable operating pressure
(MAOP)" means the maximum pressure
at which a pipeline or segment of a
pipeline may be operated under this
part.
Municipality
"Municipality" means a city, county, or
any other political subdivision of a
State.
22
Operator
"Operator" means a person who
engages in the transportation of gas
Person
"Person“ means any individual, firm,
joint venture, partnership, corporation,
association, State, municipality,
cooperative association, or joint stock
association, and includes any trustee,
receiver, assignee, or personal
representative thereof;
23
Pipe
"Pipe" means any pipe or tubing used in
the transportation of gas, including
pipe-type holders.
Pipeline
"Pipeline" or "Pipeline System" means
all parts of those physical facilities
through which gas moves in
transportation, including but not limited
to, pipe, valves, and other
appurtenance attached to pipe,
compressor units, metering stations,
regulator stations, delivery station,
holders, and fabricated assemblies.
24
Pipeline environment
“Pipeline environment” includes soil
resistivity (high or low), soil moisture
(wet or dry), soil contaminants that
may promote corrosive activity, and
other known conditions that could
affect the probability of active
corrosion.
Pipeline Facility
"Pipeline facility" means new and
existing pipeline, rights-of-way, and any
equipment, facility, or building used in
the transportation of gas or in the
treatment of gas during the course of
transportation.
25
Service Line
"Service line" means a distribution line that
transports gas from a common source of supply to an
individual customer, to two adjacent or adjoining
residential or small commercial customers, or to
multiple residential or small commercial customers
served through a meter header or manifold. A service
line ends at the outlet of the customer meter or at
the connection to a customer's piping, whichever is
further downstream, or at the connection to
customer piping if there is no meter.
Service Regulator
Service regulator means the device on a
service line that controls the pressure of
gas delivered from a higher pressure to
the pressure provided to the customer.
A service regulator may serve one
customer or multiple customers through
a meter header or manifold.
26
SMYS
"SMYS" means specified minimum yield
strength is:
(a) For steel pipe manufactured in accordance
with a listed specification, the yield strength
specified as a minimum in that specification; or
(b) For steel pipe manufactured in accordance
with an unknown or unlisted specification, the
yield strength determined in accordance with
§192.107(b)
State
"State" means each of the several
States, the District of Columbia, and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
27
Transmission Line
Transmission line means a pipeline, other than a gathering
line, that: (1) Transports gas from a gathering line or
storage facility to a distribution center, storage facility, or
large volume customer that is not down-stream from a
distribution center; (2) operates at a hoop stress of 20
percent or more of SMYS; or (3) transports gas within a
storage field.
Note: A large volume customer may receive similar volumes
of gas as a distribution center, and includes factories, power
plants, and institutional users of gas.
Amended by Direct Final Rule, 1/21/05, eff. 5/6/05.
Transportation of Gas
"Transportation of gas" means the
gathering, transmission, or distribution
of gas by pipeline, or the storage of gas
in or affecting interstate or foreign
commerce.
28
Pipelines subject to the
requirements of the federal
pipeline safety regulations
Jurisdictional Pipelines
Scope or applicability of the regulations is
defined in 191.1 and 192.1
Interpretation 192.1, March 22, 1971
"As applied to interstate transmission pipelines, the
Safety Act must prevail over and preempt any State or
State political division law, ordinance or similar mandate
. . . . Congress . . . . intended by the Natural Gas Pipeline
Safety Act of 1968 to give exclusive jurisdiction to the
Department of Transportation to regulate the safety of
'interstate transmission facilities'. The legislative history
of the Safety Act makes it clear that Congress intended
to avoid dual safety regulation of interstate transmission
facilities . . . ."
192.3 4/10/73, 192.13 3/16/71
29
Farm Taps
Operator Responsibility - Farm Tap
Farm Tap
Transmission Pipeline
Operation Responsibility - Pipeline Company
Owned by Home Owner
Operated and M aintained by Home Owner
SERV I CE- 1/4
Service Lines
Operator Responsibility - Service Line
Owned by Distribution Company

Operated and M aintained by Distribution Company
Owned by Home Owner
Operated and M aintained by Home Owner
SERV ICE- 2/4
30
Intrastate Direct Sales Lateral
Subject to revision, PIPES 2006
Operator Responsibility - Intrastate Direct Sales Lateral FERC=Interstate
Non-FERC=Intrastate
} P ro p e rty L in e
Local Distribution Company

T ransm i ssion Pipeline
O perati on R esponsi bil ity - I nterstate Pipeli ne C om pany
O w ned by F actory
F actory R esponsibi lity 10/22/96
SERV ICE.CDR
page 3/4
Operated and Maintained in accordance with Part 192
by either the Factory or the Pipeline Company
Master Meter
Operator Responsibility - Master Meter
Lo c a l Distrib utio n Co m p a ny
Owned by Distribution Company

Operation Responsibility - Distribution Company
Owned by M aster M eter
Operated and M aintai ned by Jurisdictional M aster M eter
Customer that Converts to another Form of Energy (Central Boiler)
Operated and M aintained by Customer
" Master Meter System " means a pipeline system for distributing gas within, but not limited to, a definable
area, such as a mobile home park, housing project, or apartment complex, where the operator purchases
metered gas from an outside source for resale through a gas distribution pipeline system. The gas
distribution pipeline system supplies the ultim ate consum er who either purchases the gas directly through a
meter or by other means, such as by rents;
SERV ICE- 4/4
31
Gas Gathering Line Definition;
Alternative Definition for Onshore
Lines and New Safety Standards
Amdt. 192-102
Gathering Line Regulations

• Effective date, April 14, 2006
• Modifies and adds several code sections:
– §192.1 Scope of part
– §192.7 Incorporation by reference.
– §192.8 How are onshore gathering lines and regulated
onshore gathering lines determined?
– §192.9 Gathering lines.
– Sec. 192.13 What general requirements apply to pipelines
regulated under this part?
– §192.452 Applicability to converted pipelines.
– §192.619 Maximum allowable operating pressure: Steel or
plastic pipelines.
32
§192.1 Scope of part
• Does not apply to…:
• (4) Onshore gathering of gas-
– (i) Through a pipeline that operates at less
than 0 psig (0 kPa);
– (ii) Through a pipeline that is not a regulated
onshore gathering line (as determined in §
192.8); and
– (iii) Within inlets of the Gulf of Mexico, except
for the requirements in § 192.612.
§192.7 Incorporation by
reference.
• (4) API Recommended Practice 80 (API RP
80) ‘‘Guidelines for the Definition of Onshore
Gas Gathering Lines’’ (1st edition, April
2000)
– (referenced in) §192.8
33
§192.8 How are onshore gathering lines
and regulated onshore gathering lines
determined?
• (a) (1) The beginning of gathering, under section
2.2(a)(1) of API RP 80, may not extend beyond the
furthermost downstream point in a production
operation as defined in section 2.3 of API RP 80.
This furthermost downstream point does not include
equipment that can be used in either production or
transportation, such as separators or dehydrators,
unless that equipment is involved in the processes
of “production and preparation for transportation or
delivery of hydrocarbon gas” within the meaning of
“production operation.”
Production Equipment at
each Well
34
No Production Equipment at
Individual Wells
Production, Single Phase
35
§192.8(a)(2)
• The endpoint of gathering, under section
2.2(a)(1)(A) of API RP 80, may not extend
beyond the first downstream natural gas
processing plant, unless the operator can
demonstrate, using sound engineering
principles, that gathering extends to a further
downstream plant.
Processing
36
§192.8(a)(3)
• If the endpoint of gathering, under section
2.2(a)(1)(C) of API RP 80, is determined by
the commingling of gas from separate
production fields, the fields may not be more
than 50 miles from each other, unless the
Administrator finds a longer separation
distance is justified in a particular case (see
49 CFR Sec. 190.9).
Commingling, < than 50 Miles
37
Commingling, > than 50 Miles
§192.8(a)(4)
• The endpoint of gathering, under section
2.2(a)(1)(D) of API RP 80, may not extend
beyond the furthermost downstream
compressor used to increase gathering line
pressure for delivery to another pipeline.
38
Compression
§192.8(b) Regulated Lines

• Type A
– Metallic, hoop stress > 20% SMYS and in
Class 2, 3, or 4 areas.
– Non-metallic, MAOP > 125 psig
• Type B
– Metallic, hoop stress < 20% SMYS located in
defined areas
39
• Type B defined areas
– Area 1, Class 3 or 4 location
– Area 2a, Class 2
– Area 2b, An area extending 150 feet (45.7 m) on each
side of the centerline of any continuous 1 mile (1.6 km)
of pipeline and including more than 10 but fewer than
46 dwellings.
– Area 2c, An area extending150 feet (45.7 m) on each
side of the centerline of any continuous 1000 feet (305
m) of pipeline and including 5 or more dwellings.

• Type B Safety Buffer
– If the gathering line is in Area 2(b) or 2(c), the
additional lengths of line extend upstream
and downstream from the area to a point
where the line is at least 150 feet (45.7 m)
from the nearest dwelling in the area.
However, if a cluster of dwellings in Area 2 (b)
or 2(c) qualifies a line as Type B, the Type B
classification ends 150 feet (45.7 m) from the
nearest dwelling in the cluster.
40
§ 192.9 What requirements
apply to gathering lines?
• Type A, transmission line requirements
except pigging and IM.
• Type A, Class 2 can comply with OQ by
describing qualification processes.
§ 192.9(d) Type B lines,

Requirements
• (1) If a line is new, replaced, relocated, or otherwise changed, the
design, installation, construction, initial inspection, and initial testing
must be in accordance with requirements of this part applicable to
transmission lines;
• (2) If the pipeline is metallic, control corrosion according to
requirements of subpart I of this part applicable to transmission lines;
• (3) Carry out a damage prevention program under Sec. 192.614;
• (4) Establish a public education program under Sec. 192.616;
• (5) Establish the MAOP of the line under Sec. 192.619; and
• (6) Install and maintain line markers according to the requirements for
transmission lines in Sec. 192.707.
41
§192.9 Compliance
Deadlines, Existing Lines
• Control corrosion according to Subpart I requirements for
transmission lines. April 15, 2009.
• Carry out a damage prevention program under Sec. 192.614.
October 15, 2007.
• Establish MAOP under Sec. 192.619. October 15, 2007.
• Install and maintain line markers under Sec. 192.707. April 15,
2008.
• Establish a public education program under Sec. 192.616. April
15, 2008.
• Other provisions of this part as required by paragraph (c) of this
section for Type A lines. April 15, 2009.
Sec. 192.13 What general

requirements apply to pipelines
regulated under this part?
• (a) No person may operate a segment of
pipeline listed in the first column that is
readied for service after the date in the
second column, unless:
• (b)…replaced, relocated, or otherwise
changed …
• (Regulated gathering, not subject to this part
until April 14, 2006)…March 15, 2007.
42
Sec. 192.452 How does this subpart apply
to converted pipelines and regulated
onshore gathering lines?
• Lines not previously regulated on April 14,
2006, or become regulated after April 14 due
to class location or population density
change:
– Prior to August 1, 1971 requirements apply
regardless of installation date.
– After July 31, 1971 requirements apply only if
pipeline meets the requirements.
§192.619 Maximum allowable

operating pressure: Steel or plastic
pipelines.
• (a) … no pipeline may operate at a pressure that exceeds…
• (3) The highest actual operating pressure to which the
segment was subjected during the 5 years preceding the
applicable date (unless tested or uprated…)
• (pipeline segment) Onshore gathering line that first became
subject to this part (other than Sec. 192.612) after April 13,
2006
• (pressure date) March 15, 2006, or date line becomes subject
to this part, whichever is later.
– Unless tested within 5 years preceding applicable date
43
Gathering starts at or near
wellhead:
Meter House
Wellhead
87
Where does gathering

end?
Condensate/Water Glycol Dehydration Skid
Tank
Separator
Sales
Meter House Meter
Wellhead
88
44
192.8 Onshore Gas
Gathering Lines
• Creates complex regulatory scheme with two different tiers
(Type A and Type B line segments)
– Does away with applicability of line segments within
incorporated city limits
– Introduces application of API RP-80 which defines gas
production and gathering lines (potentially shrinks gas
gathering mileage by pushing production break point
downstream)
– Creates criteria used to screen gas gathering mileage and
results in three possibilities
• Non-regulated
• Type A regulated
• Type B regulated
89
Pipeline is Gathering Lines

onshore
operates at < 0
Type A
psig. Not Must comply with 192
Regulated that is applicable to
transmission lines but
Class 1 not 192.150 and Subpart
> 20% SMYS (metalic pipe)
O. Class 2 (onshore) may
> 125 psig (non-metalic pipe) use alternate method for
Subpart N.
Offshore
gathering lines Not
No
B(b) Regulated
< 20% SMYS (metalic pipe)
+150 ft. x 1 mile
Must only with >10 but <46
Pipeline within inlets < 125 psig (non-metalic pipe) Yes
comply with dwellings
of the Gulf of Mexico
192.612 Type B
OR Only comply with 192: Safety
192.614, 192.616, 192.619, buffer
Yes 192.707, and Subpart I required.
B(c) for metalic pipelines.

Gathering
Class 2 +150 ft. x 1000 ft.

with 5 or more
dwellings No
Not
Type A Regulated
Must comply with 192
> 20% SMYS (metalic pipe) that is applicable to
transmission lines OR
> 125 psig (non-metalic pipe) (including Subpart N)
but not 192.150 and
Subpart O.
Type B
Asses pipeline B(a)
Yes Only comply with 192:
IAW API RP 80 Class 3 & 4 Class2
192.614, 192.616, 192.619,
IAW 192.5
192.707, and Subpart I
Type B for metalic pipelines.
Only comply with 192:
Transmission
< 20% SMYS (metalic pipe)

192.614, 192.616,
192.619, 192.707, and
< 125 psig (non-metalic pipe)
Subpart I for metalic
pipelines.
Follow Part 192

for Class 1, 2, 3,
or 4 Transmission
lines.
90
45
Gathering Line Summary
• Not regulated by function
• Segments that operate within proximity to
population are regulated
• Population encroachment can result in
previously non-regulated segments
becoming regulated
• Population density on regulated segments
can increase required activities or result in
an MAOP reduction
91
Inspection outside Regulated

Gathering Line Limits
Regulated gas gathering
Pressure Control
or Block Valve
A B C D
Boundaries defining regulated gathering
The section of line B - C is jurisdictional to Part 192. Lines A - B and C

- D are not. They are outside the area or class location defining
regulated gathering. However, if there is pressure control equipment or
block valves outside the limits of B - C, which would be used in the
event of an emergency inside the limits of line B - C, OPS would
inspect this equipment. They provide protection for the jurisdictional
line, B - C.
46
Liquid Pipelines
Retroactive subparts and key
definitions from 49 CFR 195
§195.0 Scope.
This part prescribes safety standards
and reporting requirements for pipeline
facilities used in the transportation of
hazardous liquids or carbon dioxide.
47
49 CFR 195
OPS does not specifically identify retroactive
subparts in Part 195, but Part 192 can be
used for guidance. Consider:
Subpart A – General
Subpart B – Reporting
Subpart E – Pressure Testing
Subpart F – Operation and Maintenance
Subpart H – Corrosion Control
Abandoned
Abandoned means permanently
removed from service.
48
Administrator
Administrator means the Administrator,
Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration or his or her delegate.
Barrel
Barrel means a unit of measurement
equal to 42 U.S. standard gallons.
49
Breakout Tank
Breakout tank means a tank used to (a)
relieve surges in a hazardous liquid
pipeline system or (b) receive and store
hazardous liquid transported by a
pipeline for reinjection and continued
transportation by pipeline.
Carbon dioxide
Carbon dioxide means a fluid consisting
of more than 90 percent carbon dioxide
molecules compressed to a supercritical
state.
50
Component
Component means any part of a
pipeline which may be subjected to
pump pressure including, but not
limited to, pipe, valves, elbows, tees,
flanges, and closures.
Computation Pipeline Monitoring

(CPM)
Computation Pipeline Monitoring (CPM)

means a software-based monitoring
tool that alerts the pipeline dispatcher
of a possible pipeline operating anomaly
that may be indicative of a commodity
release.
51
Control room
“Control room” means an operations
center staffed by personnel charged
with the responsibility for remotely
monitoring and controlling a pipeline
facility.
Controller
“Controller” means a qualified individual
who remotely monitors and controls the
safety-related operations of a pipeline
facility via a SCADA system from a
control room, and who has operational
authority and accountability for the
remote operational functions of the
pipeline facility.
52
Corrosive product
Corrosive product means "corrosive
material" as defined by §173.136 Class
8-Definitions of this chapter.
Exposed pipeline
Exposed pipeline means an underwater
pipeline where the top of the pipe
protrudes above the underwater natural
bottom (as determined by recognized
and generally accepted practices) in
waters less than 15 feet (4.6 meters)
deep, as measured from mean low
water.
53
Flammable product
Flammable product means "flammable
liquid" as defined by §173.120 Class 3-
Definitions of this chapter.
Gathering line
Gathering line means a pipeline 219.1
mm (8 5/8 in) or less nominal outside
diameter that transports petroleum
from a production facility.
54
Gulf of Mexico and its inlets
Gulf of Mexico and its inlets means the
waters from the mean high water mark
of the coast of the Gulf of Mexico and
its inlets open to the sea (excluding
rivers, tidal marshes, lakes, and canals)
seaward to include the territorial sea
and Outer Continental Shelf to a depth
of 15 feet (4.6 meters), as measured
from the mean low water.
Hazardous Liquid
Hazardous liquid means petroleum,
petroleum products, or anhydrous
ammonia.
55
Hazard to navigation
Hazard to navigation means, for the
purposes of this part, a pipeline where
the top of the pipe is less than 12
inches (305 millimeters) below the
underwater natural bottom (as
determined by recognized and generally
accepted practices) in waters less than
15 feet (4.6 meters) deep, as measured
Highly volatile liquid or HVL

Highly volatile liquid or HVL means a
hazardous liquid which will form a vapor
cloud when released to the atmosphere
and which has a vapor pressure
exceeding 276 kPa (40 psia) at 37.8
deg C (100 deg F).
56
In-plant piping systems
In-plant piping systems means piping that is
located on the grounds of a plant and used to
transfer hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide
between plant facilities or between plant
facilities and a pipeline or other mode of
transportation, not including any device and
associated piping that are necessary to
control pressure in the pipeline under
§195.406(b).
Interstate Pipeline
Interstate pipeline means a pipeline or
that part of a pipeline that is used in
the transportation of hazardous liquid or
carbon dioxide in interstate or foreign
commerce.
57
Intrastate Pipeline
Intrastate pipeline means a pipeline or
that part of a pipeline to which this part
applies that is not an interstate pipeline.
Line section
Line section means a continuous run of
pipe between adjacent pressure pump
stations, between a pressure pump
station and terminal or breakout tanks,
between a pressure pump station and a
block valve, or between adjacent block
valves.
58
Low stress pipeline
Low stress pipeline means a hazardous
liquid pipeline that is operated in its
entirety at a stress level of 20 percent
or less of the specified minimum yield
strength of the line pipe.
Maximum operating pressure

Maximum operating pressure (MOP)
means the maximum pressure at which
a pipeline or segment of a pipeline may
be normally operated under this part.
(Part 195 definition only)
59
Nominal wall thickness
Nominal wall thickness means the wall
thickness listed in the pipe
specifications.
Offshore
Offshore means beyond the line of
ordinary low water along that portion of
the coast of the United States that is in
direct contact with the open seas and
beyond the line marking the seaward
limit of inland waters.
60
Outer Continental Shelf
Outer Continental Shelf means all
submerged lands lying seaward and
outside the area of lands beneath
navigable waters as defined in Section 2
of the Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1301) and of which the subsoil and
seabed appertain to the United States
and are subject to its jurisdiction and
control.
Operator
Operator means a person who owns or
operates pipeline facilities.
61
Person
Person means any individual, firm, joint
venture, partnership, corporation,
association, State, municipality,
cooperative association, or joint stock
association, and includes any trustee,
receiver, assignee, or personal
representative thereof.
Petroleum
Petroleum means crude oil, condensate,
natural gasoline, natural gas liquids,
and liquefied petroleum gas.
62
Petroleum product
Petroleum product means flammable,
toxic, or corrosive products obtained
from distilling and processing of crude
oil, unfinished oils, natural gas liquids,
blend stocks and other miscellaneous
hydrocarbon compounds.
Pipe or line pipe

Pipe or line pipe means a tube, usually
cylindrical, through which a hazardous
liquid or carbon dioxide flows from one
point to another.
63
Pipeline or Pipeline System
Pipeline or pipeline system means all parts of
a pipeline facility through which a hazardous
liquid or carbon dioxide moves in
transportation, including, but not limited to,
line pipe, valves and other appurtenances
connected to line pipe, pumping units,
fabricated assemblies associated with
pumping units, metering and delivery stations
and fabricated assemblies therein, and
breakout tanks.
Pipeline Facility
Pipeline facility means new and existing
pipe, rights-of-way, and any equipment,
facility, or building used in the
transportation of hazardous liquids or
carbon dioxide.
64
Production facility
Production facility means piping or equipment used in
the production, extraction, recovery, lifting,
stabilization, separation or treating of petroleum or
carbon dioxide, or associated storage or
measurement. (To be a production facility under this
definition, piping or equipment must be used in the
process of extracting petroleum or carbon dioxide
from the ground or from facilities where carbon
dioxide is produced, and preparing it for
transportation by pipeline. This includes piping
between treatment plants which extract carbon
dioxide, and facilities utilized for the injection of
carbon dioxide for recovery operations.)
Rural area
Rural area means outside the limits of
any incorporated or unincorporated city,
town, village, or any other designated
residential or commercial area such as a
subdivision, a business or shopping
center, or community development.
65
Specified minimum yield strength
Specified minimum yield strength

means the minimum yield strength,
expressed in p.s.i. (kPa) gage,
prescribed by the specification under
which the material is purchased from
the manufacturer.
Stress level
Stress level means the level of
tangential or hoop stress, usually
expressed as a percentage of specified
minimum yield strength.
66
Supervisory Control and Data
Acquisition (SCADA)
Supervisory Control and Data
Acquisition (SCADA) system means a
computer-based system or systems
used by a controller in a control room
that collects and displays information
about a pipeline facility and may have
the ability to send commands back to
the pipeline facility.
Surge pressure
Surge pressure means pressure
produced by a change in velocity of the
moving stream that results from
shutting down a pump station or
pumping unit, closure of a valve, or any
other blockage of the moving stream.
67
Toxic product
Toxic product means "poisonous
material" as defined by 173.132 Class 6,
Division 6.1-Definitions of this chapter.
Unusually sensitive area (USA)

Unusually sensitive area (USA) means a
drinking water or ecological resource
area that is unusually sensitive to
environmental damage from a
hazardous liquid pipeline release, as
identified under §195.6.
68
§195.3 Incorporation by
reference
Incorporate by reference all or portions of over 60
consensus standards and specifications for the
design, construction, and operation of pipeline
facilities
Pipeline Research Council International, Inc. (PRCI)
American Petroleum Institute (API)
ASME International (ASME)
Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and
Fittings Industry, Inc. (MSS)
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
NACE International (NACE)
§195.4 Compatibility
No person may transport any hazardous
liquid or carbon dioxide unless the
hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide is
chemically compatible with both the
pipeline, including all components, and
any other commodity that it may come
into contact with while in the pipeline.
69
§195.5 Conversion to service
subject to this part.
Written procedures required
Review of design, construction, operation and
maintenance history
Inspection of ROW
Unsafe conditions and defects corrected
Tested under Subpart E
Corrosion control within 12 months
Records of investigations, tests, repairs,
replacements and alterations for life of
pipeline
§195.6 Unusually Sensitive

Areas
As used in this part, a USA means a
drinking water or ecological resource
area that is unusually sensitive to
environmental damage from a
hazardous liquid pipeline release.
70
Drinking Water Resources
The water intake for a Community

Water System – surface water
The Source Water Protection Area –
aquifers without alternative source
The sole source aquifer recharge area
Ecological Resource
(1) An area containing a critically

imperiled species or ecological
community;
(2) A multi-species assemblage area;
(3) A migratory water bird
concentration area;
71
Ecological Resource
(4) An area containing an imperiled
species, threatened or endangered
species, depleted marine mammal
species, or an imperiled ecological
community where the species or
community is aquatic, aquatic
dependent, or terrestrial with a limited
range; or
Ecological Resource
(5) An area containing an imperiled species,
threatened or endangered species, depleted
marine mammal species, or imperiled
ecological community where the species or
community occurrence is considered to be
one of the most viable, highest quality, or in
the best condition, as identified by an
element occurrence ranking (EORANK) of A
(excellent quality) or B (good quality).
(show full regulation)
72
New USA, Reporting
If new USA identified, must comply
according to various dates
Keep records
§195.8 Transportation…other
than steel pipe
Must notify PHMSA 90 days before
transportation is to begin.
Name of product transported,
properties, material of pipeline
Administrator can order the person not
to transport is considered unduly
hazardous.
73
§195.10 Responsibility of operator
for compliance with this part.
An operator may make arrangements

with another person for the
performance of any action required by
this part. However, the operator is not
thereby relieved from the responsibility
for compliance with any requirement of
this part.
§ 195.11 What is a regulated rural gathering

line and what requirements apply?
Added, Final Rule - Federal Register:

June 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 107)
Each operator of a regulated rural
gathering line, as defined in paragraph
(a) of this section, must comply with
the safety requirements described in
paragraph (b) of this section.
74
Regulated Rural Gathering
Line
(a) …means an onshore gathering line in a rural area that meets
all of the following criteria-
(1) Has a nominal diameter from 6-5/8 inches (168 mm) to 8-
5/8 inches (219.1 mm);
(2) Is located in or within one-quarter mile (.40 km) of an
unusually sensitive area as defined in § 195.6; and
(3) Operates at a maximum pressure established under §
195.406 corresponding to--
(i) A stress level greater than 20-percent of the specified minimum
yield strength of the line pipe; or
(ii) If the stress level is unknown or the pipeline is not constructed
with steel pipe, a pressure of more than 125 psi (861 kPa) gage.
Safety Requirements
Identify segments by April 3, 2009
After July 3, 2009, design, install,
construct, inspect, test according to this
part
Reporting
MOP determination, 195.406
Line markers, 195.410
75
Safety Requirements
Public education, 195.440
Damage prevention program, 195.442
Corrosion control, Subpart H
Monitor for internal corrosion
Operator qualification
If new USA, then must comply with safety
requirements within 6 months
Keep records
§ 195.12 What requirements apply

to low-stress pipelines in rural areas?
Amended, Final Rule - Federal Register Volume 76,

Number 87 (Thursday, May 5, 2011)
Effective Date: October 1, 201(a)
General. This Section sets forth the requirements for
each category of low-stress pipeline in a rural area
set forth in paragraph (b) of this Section. This
Section does not apply to a rural low-stress pipeline
regulated under this Part as a low-stress pipeline that
crosses a waterway currently used for commercial
navigation; these pipelines are regulated pursuant to
§ 195.1(a)(2).
76
Low stress pipelines in rural
areas - Category 1
(i) Has a nominal diameter of 8\5/8\ inches (219.1
mm) or more;
(ii) Is located in or within one-half mile (.80 km) of
an unusually sensitive area (USA) as defined in §
195.6; and
(iii) Operates at a maximum pressure established
under § 195.406 corresponding to:
(A) A stress level equal to or less than 20-percent of the specified
minimum yield strength of the line pipe; or
(B) If the stress level is unknown or the pipeline is not constructed
with steel pipe, a pressure equal to or less than 125 psi (861 kPa)
gauge.

areas - Category 2
(i) Has a nominal diameter of less than 8\5/8\ inches
(219.1mm);
(ii) Is located in or within one-half mile (.80 km) of
an unusually sensitive area (USA) as defined in §
195.6; and
(iii) Operates at a maximum pressure established
under § 195.406 corresponding to:
(A) A stress level equal to or less than 20-percent of the specified
(B) If the stress level is unknown or the pipeline is not constructed
with steel pipe, a pressure equal to or less than 125 psi (861 kPa)
gage.
77
areas - Category 3
(i) Has a nominal diameter of any size and is not
located in or within one-half mile (.80 km) of an
unusually sensitive area (USA) as defined in § 195.6;
and
(ii) Operates at a maximum pressure established
under § 195.406 corresponding to a stress level
equal to or less than 20-percent of the specified
(iii) If the stress level is unknown or the pipeline is
not constructed with steel pipe, a pressure equal to
or less than 125 psi (861 kPa) gage.
Requirements – Category 1
Identify segments by April 3, 2009
Begin reporting by January 3, 2009
Establish IM program, 195.452, by July 3,
2009
May use 195.452(a) in lieu of ½ mile buffer
All baseline assessments (195.452(c)) before July
3, 2015, 50% before January 3, 2012.
Comply with all parts by July 3, 2009, except
Subpart H by July 3, 2011.
78
Identify segments by July 1, 2012
Establish IM program, 195.452, by Oct. 1,
2012
May use 195.452(a) in lieu of ½ mile buffer
All baseline assessments (195.452(c)) before Oct.
1, 2016, 50% before April 1, 2014.
Comply with all parts by Oct. 1, 2012, except
Subpart H by Oct. 1, 2014.
Identify segments by July 1, 2012
Comply with all parts except 195.452 (IM),
Subpart B (reporting), Subpart H before Oct.
1, 2012
Subpart H before Oct. 1, 2014
79
Economic Burden
May notify PHMSA of the following situation
Category 1 rural low-stress;
Carries crude from production;
Flow rate <= 14,000 bpd; and
Operator would abandon or shut-down as a result of
economic burden of compliance
Notice must include operating information, history,
cost of compliance, amount of production…
PHMSA will analyze and may grant special permit for
alternative safety requirements
Unusually Sensitive Areas
Protection From Rural Onshore Hazardous

Liquid Gathering Lines and Low-Stress
Lines
80
§195.6 Unusually Sensitive
Areas
• As used in this part, a USA means a
drinking water or ecological resource area
that is unusually sensitive to environmental
damage from a hazardous liquid pipeline
release.
Drinking Water Resources

• The water intake for a Community Water
System – surface water
• The Source Water Protection Area –
aquifers without alternative source
• The sole source aquifer recharge area
81
Ecological Resource
• (1) An area containing a critically
imperiled species or ecological community;
• (2) A multi-species assemblage area;
• (3) A migratory water bird concentration
area;
195.450 High Consequence Area

• (1) A commercially navigable waterway,
• (2) A high population area, > 50,000
people and density at least 1000/sq. mi.
• (3) An other populated area, concentrated
population
• (4) An unusually sensitive area,
82
Determining Jurisdiction of
Liquid Pipelines
83
84
85
86
End of Liquids Jurisdiction
slides
Navigable Waterways
Resource Information
87
Oil Pollution Act of 1990
• (21) "navigable waters" means the waters of
the United States, including the territorial
sea;
§195.450 High Consequence

Areas - Definitions
• High consequence area means:
• (1) A commercially navigable waterway,
which means a waterway where a
substantial likelihood of commercial
navigation exists;
88
Navigable Waterways
• 33 CFR § 2.36 Navigable waters of the United
States, navigable waters, and territorial waters.
• (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, navigable waters of the United States,
navigable waters, and territorial waters mean,
except where Congress has designated them not to
be navigable waters of the United States:
33 CFR § 2.36 Navigable

waters
• (1) Territorial seas of the United States;
• (2) Internal waters of the United States that are
subject to tidal influence; and
89
33 CFR § 2.36 Navigable
waters
• (3) Internal waters of the United States not subject to tidal influence
that:
• (i) Are or have been used, or are or have been susceptible for use, by
themselves or in connection with other waters, as highways for
substantial interstate or foreign commerce, notwithstanding natural or
man-made obstructions that require portage, or
• (ii) A governmental or non-governmental body, having expertise in
waterway improvement, determines to be capable of improvement at a
reasonable cost (a favorable balance between cost and need) to
provide, by themselves or in connection with other waters, as
highways for substantial interstate or foreign commerce.
Part 194 - Response Plans for

Onshore Oil Pipelines
• §194.5 Definitions
– Navigable waters means the waters of the
United States, including the territorial sea and
such waters as lakes, rivers, streams; waters
which are used for recreation; and waters from
which fish or shellfish are taken and sold in
interstate or foreign commerce.
90
Office of Pipeline Safety
• Commercially Navigable Waterway Data
– http://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/data/data_cnw.htm
– http://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/application.asp?tact=
Data&page=subapp.asp?app=data&act=data_cnw
– http://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/default.htm click on
Data requests, CNW data
• Data sets derived from IMP rulemaking.
– 2000 and 2002 BTS data
– excluding all non-commercial routes designated as no-
traffic, non-navigable, and/or for special vessels such as
fishing, power, and recreational boats.
US Army Corps of Engineers

• NDC Publications and U.S. Waterway Data
CD
– http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/cd/cdinfo.htm
• National Waterway Network
– http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/data/datanwn.htm
• The U.S. Waterway Data
– http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/data/data1.htm
91
Bureau of Transportation Statistics
• 2002 National Transportation Atlas Data

Shapefile Download Center
– http://www.bts.gov/programs/geographic_information_
services/download_sites/ntad02/maindownload.html
• Mapping Center
– http://www.transtats.bts.gov/MappingCenter.asp
• NTAD 2002 Interactive Download
– http://websas.bts.gov/website/ntadviewer02/viewer.htm
NTAD 2002 Interactive Download
92
NTAD 2002 Interactive Download
§195.260 Valves: Location.

• (e) On each side of a water crossing that is more than 100
feet (30 meters) wide from high-water mark to high-water
mark…
93
§195.260 Valves: Location.
• …unless the
Administrator finds in a
particular case that valves
are not justified.
• Apply for a waiver and
show that alternative
provides a level of safety
equivalent to the valve
spacing requirement
Waiver 195 Mainline Block

Valves
• Valves will have:
– Automation
– Remote control
– Redundant power and communication
• Remote control and line break sensing go
beyond requirements
• Petition is approved
94
11/3/2011
Breakout Tanks
EPA/DOT Jurisdictional
Boundaries
Breakout tank
means a tank used to (a) relieve surges

in a hazardous liquid pipeline system or
(b) receive and store hazardous liquid
transported by a pipeline for reinjection
and continued transportation by
pipeline.
1
11/3/2011
Breakout Tankage
BREAKOUT TANKAGE
Pump
M Meter
Valve Product
Fence Tank OPS
(Breakout) Inspection
MAIN LINE
Processing/Terminal Tankage
TERMINAL TANKAGE
PROCESSING
Pump
PLANT
M Meter
Valve
Fence
OPS Inspection
(Enforcement Policy)
Product No OPS Inspection

Tank
(Terminal)
MAIN LINE
2
11/3/2011
Terminal Tankage
TERMINAL TANKAGE
Pump
M Meter
Valve
Loading
Fence
Terminal
OPS Inspection
No OPS Inspection
Product Product M
Tank Tank OPS Inspection Stops
(Terminal) (Terminal) (Enforcement Policy)
MAIN LINE
Refinery & Refinery Piping

REFINERY & REFINERY PIPING
Can be any Type of Pressure Control

OPS Inspection Starts - Pump, ESD, Pressure Relief, etc.
OPS Inspection
No OPS Inspection
Pump
Fence
3
11/3/2011
Refinery & Refinery Piping

REFINERY & REFINERY PIPING
Can be any Type of Pressure Control

- Pump, ESD, Pressure Relief, etc.
OPS Inspection Stops
OPS Inspection
No OPS Inspection
Pump
Fence
Refinery Tankage
TERMINAL TANKAGE
Product Product Mix Mix

Tank Tank Tank Tank
(Terminal) (Terminal) (Terminal) (Terminal)
Pump
M Meter
Valve
Fence
Loading
Terminal
OPS Inspection
No OPS Inspection
Product Product M
Tank Tank OPS Inspection Stops
(Terminal) (Terminal) (Enforcement Policy)
MAIN LINE
4
11/3/2011
Terminal & Breakout Tankage

TERMINAL & BREAKOUT TANKAGE
Product Product Mix Mix

Tank Tank Tank Tank
(Terminal) (Terminal) (Breakout) (Breakout)
Pump
M Meter
Valve
Fence
Loading
Terminal
OPS Inspection
No OPS Inspection
Product Product
M M
Tank Tank
(Breakout) (Terminal)
MAIN LINE
5
Pipeline Regulatory Structure
Federal Pipeline Safety Programs

Federal and State Jurisdiction
Agency List
Department of Transportation
PHMSA (formerly RSPA)
– Office of Pipeline Safety
RITA (formerly RSPA)
– Transportation Safety Institute
Department of Homeland Security
– U.S. Coast Guard, National Response Center
National Transportation Safety Board
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation
and Enforcement
1
Department of Transportation
Cabinet level department
Overall responsibility for pipeline safety
through its agency, PHMSA
Issues pipeline safety & drug testing
regulations 49 CFR Part 190-199 and Part
40
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century, One-Call grants
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials

Safety Administration
…duties and powers related to pipeline and
hazardous materials transportation and
safety vested in the Secretary by chapters
51, 57, 61, 601, and 603
Office of Pipeline Safety is in this
Administration
Reorganization completed Feb. 20, 2005
2
Responsible for national pipeline safety program
Inspects for compliance with DOT regulations
Carries out enforcement actions as defined in 49
CFR Part 190
Issues Advisory Bulletins and Alert Notices
Conducts data analysis to aid in pipeline safety
Advised by TPSSC and THLPSSC
Research And Innovative

Technology Administration
(A) coordination, facilitation, and review of the
Department's research and development programs and
activities;
(B) advancement, and research and development, of
innovative technologies, including intelligent
transportation systems;
(C) comprehensive transportation statistics research,
analysis, and reporting;
(D) education and training in transportation and
transportation-related fields; and
(E) activities of the Volpe National Transportation Center
Reorganization completed Feb. 20, 2005
3
Office of Training &
Qualifications
Located at the Transportation Safety
Institute
– Richard Sanders, Director, Training and
Qualifications
– Training for state and federal inspectors
– Conducts state safety seminars with state
agencies
– Assists in regulatory development
– Personnel are members of many technical
committees
Department of Homeland
Security
Security of national energy transportation
system
Additional pipeline security responsibilities
as required by PL 110-53
Review, inspect pipeline security
– MOU with DOT
• TSA
• PHMSA
4
U. S. Coast Guard
Reports to the Secretary, Department of
Homeland Security (was formerly under
RSPA, DOT)
Operates National Response Center
Receives telephonic notices required by 49
CFR 191.5 at 800-424-8802
Issues report number to operator
National Transportation Safety

Board
Independent agency chartered by Congress
Investigates aviation and other significant
transportation incidents, including pipeline
Determines probable cause of
– Pipeline incidents with fatalities or substantial
property damage
– Releases of hazardous materials
– Transportation incidents of recurring nature
Issues safety recommendations
5
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,
Regulation and Enforcement (updated)
Formerly Minerals Management Service
Bureau within the Department of the Interior
Manages natural gas, oil and other minerals on the
outer continental shelf
Regulations in 30 CFR 250 Subpart J pertain
specifically to pipelines
MOUs with DOT define regulatory responsibility
– MMS regulates the producer side
– DOT regulates the transportation side
Federal Jurisdiction
Federal government develops, issues and
enforces regulations
PHMSA has safety jurisdiction over all
operators
PHMSA inspects interstate operators
PHMSA inspects intrastate operators where
states do not have jurisdiction
PHMSA audits state programs
6
State Jurisdiction
States may be certified to inspect and
enforce pipeline safety for intrastate
systems if:
– The state adopts regulations at least as stringent
as federal regulations
– The state provides for injunctive and monetary
sanctions substantially the same those in federal
law (NGPSA, HLPSA)
State Jurisdiction
States not certified under USC 60105 may
enter into an agreement for inspection
– Probable violations are reported to PHMSA for
further action
Currently 9 states also act as Interstate
Agents, to conduct inspections on natural
gas interstate facilities.
7
States with liquid program
Alabama Mississippi
Arizona New Mexico
California (Fire New York
Marshal) Oklahoma
Indiana Texas
Louisiana Virginia
Maryland Washington
Minnesota West Virginia
States acting as interstate agents

Arizona
California (Fire Marshal)
Minnesota
New York
Virginia
Washington
8
Pipeline Safety Laws
Regulations
PIPES 2006
Pipeline Safety Acts
The Acts authorize the

Secretary of Transportation to
prescribe safety standards for
the transportation of gas and
hazardous liquids
1
Regulations from the Acts
Part 190 Enforcement Procedures
Part 191 Reporting Requirements
Part 192 Gas Pipeline Safety Minimum
Safety Standards
Part 193 LNG Facility Safety
Part 194 Response Plans for Onshore
Oil Pipelines

Part 195 Liquid Pipeline Minimum
Safety Standards
Part 198 Grants to State Pipeline
Programs
Part 199 Drug Testing
Part 40 Procedures for Workplace Drug
Testing Programs (OST)
2
Oil Pollution and
the Environment
– Requires operators to prepare plans for oil
spill response
– 49 CFR 194 implemented January 1993
– Final rule, 2/23/05, eff. 3/25/05
Pipeline Safety Act of 1992 added "and the
protection of the environment", to the law.
Recodification
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968,
as amended, and
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act of
1979, as amended
Recodified as USC Chapter 601 in 1994
3
Creating a Regulation
Congress grants authority to DOT
PHMSA designated agency to create and enforce
regulation
Need for regulation
– Congressional mandate
– OPS identifies need
– NTSB recommendation
– Request from industry/NAPSR/public
– TPSSC/HLPSSC recommendation
Creating a regulation
Published in Federal Register
Docket Management System http://dms.dot.gov
– ANPRM
– NPRM
• OPS review/TPSSC/HLPSSC
– Public Meetings
– Comment period
– Final rule
Read the comments and preambles!!!!
4
Pipeline Safety
Reauthorization
Proposed Legislation
Re-authorization of pipeline safety
Congress yet to enact new legislation.

Several bills in Congress now.
– Increase penalties
– Require automatic or remote control valves
– EFV’s for branch and small commercial services
– Expand transmission IM areas
– Add more federal personnel for inspection, data
analysis, support operations
5
Pipeline Transportation Safety
Improvement Act of 2011
Introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenberg
Ready for vote in Senate
Prescribes or revises requirements for
safety and environmental protection in
pipeline transportation.
Proposed requirements
Violation resulting in incident with 1 or
more or injuries or environmental damage
$250,000 per violation, max $2.5 million
Removes exceptions in state one-call
systems for municipalities or state agencies
Remove exceptions for offshore liquid
gathering
6
Remote control or automatic valves on new
or entirely replaced transmission lines
EFV’s on branch services and small
commercial facilities
Evaluate Integrity Management
– Should IM be extended beyond current HCA
– Would extending IM do away with class
location
– Should data outside HCA be included in in
operator’s records.
Prescribe new regulations as appropriate
Should HCA’s include seismicity of area
7
Public awareness – public access
– Maintain record of inspections
– Status of response plans
– Maps of pipelines in HCA’s
Survey of cast-iron replacement plans
Study of leak detection systems on
hazardous liquid lines
Specify time limit for reporting incidents
Provide geospatial information to the
National Pipeline Mapping System
International cooperation
Review all gathering line exceptions
Assist Alaska with pipeline oversight
Operators pay for safety reviews for new
pipelines
8
Modify waiver process to review
operator’s request and issue waiver good
for 5 years
Include bio-fuels in hazardous liquid
regulations
Regulate CO2 when transported as a gas
Study transportation of oil-tar sands
Study non-petroleum hazardous liquids
MAOP
– Verify records for HCA
– Document pipelines with insufficient records to
confirm MAOP
– Report any exceeding MAOP + buildup within 5
days
– Pipelines with insufficient records to reconfirm
MAOP
9
Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job
Creation Act of 2011
Introduced by Rep. Schuster
Prohibits expansion of IM beyond current

HCA’s
Reporting for incidents between 1 and 2
hours
Lower penalties than other bills
Other similar provisions
Pipeline Security
September 2002
– DOT Pipeline Security Information Circular
and the Pipeline Security Contingency
Planning Guidance.
– Define critical pipeline facilities
– Identify means to protect
– Explains how DOT OPS will verify security
10
Pipeline Security
Guidelines for protective measures for
specific threats
– Critical pipelines
• Viable terrorist targets
• Important to national energy infrastructure
• Probability the facility could be used as a weapon
to harm people
Pipeline Security
September 2004
– DOT and DHS sign an MOU
– Improve cooperation and coordination
August 2006
– Annex to MOU
– TSA lead role in transportation security
– Build on current initiatives
– Shared commitment to risk-based approach
– Further defines roles of each agency
11
Pipeline Security
Transportation Security Administration
pipeline security page
http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/tsnm/pipe
lines/index.shtm
Pipeline Corporate Security Review
– On-site visits
– Monthly conference calls
– Security inspections of critical facilities
12
11/3/2011
Pipeline Safety
Regulations
Introduction
49 CFR Part 191

• Transportation Of Natural And Other Gas
By Pipeline; Annual Reports, Incident
Reports, And Safety-related Condition
Reports
• § 191.1 Scope.
– (a) This part prescribes requirements for the
reporting of incidents, safety-related conditions, and
annual pipeline summary data by operators of gas
pipeline facilities located in the United States or
Puerto Rico, including pipelines within the limits of
the Outer Continental Shelf as that term is defined in
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act [43 U.S.C.
1331].
1
11/3/2011
49 CFR 192
• Transportation Of Natural And Other Gas
By Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety
Standards
• § 192.1 What is the scope of this part?
– (a) This part prescribes minimum safety
49 CFR 195
• Transportation Of Hazardous Liquids By
Pipeline
• §195.0 Scope.
– This part prescribes safety standards and
reporting requirements for pipeline facilities
used in the transportation of hazardous
liquids or carbon dioxide.
2
11/3/2011
Scope of Pipeline Regulations

• “Cradle to Grave” safety requirements
• Design
• Construction
• Training & Operator Qualification
• Operations & Maintenance
• Emergency Response
• Abandonment
• Substance Abuse Prevention
Major Compliance Categories

• O&M Manual • Emergency Response
• Equipment Inspections • Public Awareness
• Integrity Management • Substance Abuse
• ROW Surveillance Programs (D/A Testing)
• Damage Prevention • Reporting
• Corrosion Protection • Documentation
• Training & OQ
3
11/3/2011
Compliance Requirements
• Generally the same for gas and liquid pipelines.

• Regulated gas lines affected by Class Location.
– design, pressure testing, non-destructing testing,
valve locations, leakage surveys, patrolling,
odorization, burial depth, line marking, integrity
management, internal inspection.
• If gas pipelines are jurisdictional, must
determine class location to determine specific
requirements.
O&M
• O&M Manual must be up to date and
reviewed annually
• Must have procedures
– Operating (Start-up, Shut-down, AOC)
– Maintenance
– Emergency Response
4
11/3/2011
Equipment & Corrosion Inspections

• Isolation Valves
• Pressure Limiting Devices
– PSVs, ESD System, Pressure Control Valves
• Exposed piping for external damage
• Corrosion related
– Internal examinations for open piping systems
– Atmospheric external inspections
– Coupons in corrosive systems
– Cathodic Protection
• Protection Potentials, Rectifier Output, Bonds
• Tanks Part 195
Emergency Procedures
• Gas Emergency Management

– Subpart L Operations
• 192.605 ER Procedure
• 192.615 Emergency Plan
• Hazardous Liquids Emergency Management
– Subpart F Operations & Maintenance
• 195.402 ER Procedures
• 195.403 Training
5
11/3/2011
Emergency Response
• Written Plans
• Train Personnel & Evaluate
Effectiveness
• Coordination with Agencies
• Communication
Emergency Procedures
• Receiving, identifying, and classifying notices

of events which require immediate response by
the operator
• General communications
• Response to different types of emergency
• Protection of people, property and the
environment
6
11/3/2011
Emergency Procedures (continued)
• Emergency shutdown
• Notifying and coordinating with
appropriate emergency response
agencies and other public officials
• Safely restoring service
• Actions to be taken by controllers
during an emergency.
Documentation
• Annual reports (will be covered later)
• OQ records
• Construction
• MAOP Determination
• Maintenance and Other Inspection
7
11/3/2011
ROW Inspection
• Periodic Inspections Required
– Encroachment
– Class location changes
– Leaks
– Landslides, washouts, unstable soil
• Navigable waterway crossings (195)
• HCA identification
• Assessments
• Analysis
• Remedial actions
• Re-assessments
• Preventive and mitigative measures
• Measure effectiness
8
11/3/2011
Control Room
• Procedures
• Fatigue mitigation
• Alarms
• Training
Amendments to Regulations*
• Part 190 – 15 • Part 195 - 98
• Part 191 - 22 • Part 198 - 5
• Part 192 – 120 • Part 199 - 25
• Part 193 - 24 • Part 40 - 25
• Part 194 - 7
• *Numbers are
approximate
9
11/3/2011
Structure of the Regulations

• Part – 49 CFR Part 192/195
• Subpart – Subpart A-O (192). A-H (195)
• Section – 192.625 Odorization
• Paragraph – 192.625(a)
• Appendices
10
Applicability of DOT Pipeline &
Facility Regulations
49 CFR Part 192

49 CFR Part 192 - Transportation of Natural
and Other Gas by Pipeline: Minimum Federal
Safety Standards
§192.1 What is the scope of this part?
(a) This part prescribes minimum safety
2
1
49 CFR Part 192
49 CFR Part 195

49 CFR Part 195 - Transportation of Hazardous
Liquids by Pipeline
§195.0 Scope. This part prescribes safety
standards and reporting requirements for pipeline
facilities used in the transportation of hazardous
§195.1 Applicability. (a)…this part applies to
pipeline facilities and the transportation of hazardous
liquids or carbon dioxide associated with those
facilities in or affecting interstate or foreign
commerce, including pipeline facilities on the Outer
Continental Shelf.
2
49 CFR Part 195
49 CFR Part 193

Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities: Federal Safety Standards
a) This part prescribes safety standards for LNG facilities used in the transportation
of gas by pipeline that is subject to the pipeline safety laws (49 U.S.C. 60101 et
seq.) and Part 192 of this chapter.
b) This part does not apply to:
1) LNG facilities used by ultimate consumers of LNG or natural gas.
2) LNG facilities used in the course of natural gas treatment or hydrocarbon
extraction which do not store LNG.
3) In the case of a marine cargo transfer system and associated facilities, any
matter other than siting pertaining to the system or facilities between the
marine vessel and the last manifold (or in the absence of a manifold, the
last valve) located immediately before a storage tank.
4) Any LNG facility located in navigable waters (as defined in Section 3(8) of
the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(8)).
3
49 CFR Part 193
Applicability Determination
Are you transporting a fluid by pipeline?
Is the fluid regulated?
Is the pipeline within the scope of the
regulations?
Some types of lines / locations / situations
are exempt
What facilities are covered?
4
Definition of a Pipeline
(DOT 192) Pipeline - means all parts of those physical facilities
through which gas moves in transportation, including pipe,
valves, and other appurtenance attached to pipe, compressor
units, metering stations, regulator stations, delivery stations,
holders, and fabricated assemblies.
(DOT 195) Pipeline or pipeline system - means all parts of a

pipeline facility through which a hazardous liquid or carbon
dioxide moves in transportation, including, but not limited to,
line pipe, valves and other appurtenances connected to line
pipe, pumping units, fabricated assemblies associated with
pumping units, metering and delivery stations and fabricated
assemblies therein, and breakout tanks.
Definition of a Pipeline Facility

(DOT 192) Pipeline Facility - means new and existing
pipeline, rights-of-way, and any equipment, facility,
or building used in the transportation of gas or in the
treatment of gas during the course of transportation.
(DOT 195) Pipeline Facility - means new and existing

pipe, rights-of-way, and any equipment, facility, or
building used in the transportation of hazardous
10
5
What is the product type and
fluid state?
Is the fluid a gas or liquid at the conditions of
transportation?
The type and state of a fluid at conditions of
transportation will determine which regulation
may be applicable;
Part 192 (Gas)
Part 193 (Liquefied Natural Gas)
Part 195 (Hazardous Liquids)
11
General Overview of Fluid Types

Types
Liquid
Highly Volatile Liquids (HVLs)
Supercritical
Gas
Multiple Phase
Fluid Type is a function of PVT conditions
Reference phase diagram for material
12
6
Supercritical Fluids
Supercritical Fluid exists only when
temperatures and pressures are ≥ to those at
the critical point of a substance
Above the critical point, neither liquid or gas
phases exist; instead, a poorly defined phase,
known as a supercritical fluid
Have the gas-like characteristic of low
viscosity and the liquid-like characteristic of
high density
13
Phase Diagram CO2

The critical temperature for carbon dioxide is 31.1°C, and the critical pressure is 74 atm.
SOLID
Pressure (bar)
SUPERCRITICAL
FLUID
LIQUID
Critical Point
GAS
Triple Point
Temperature (K)
14
7
Regulated Fluids
Part 195 Liquids
Part 192 Gas
Part 193 Liquefied Natural Gas
15
Part 195 Hazardous Liquids
16
8
Hazardous Liquids that are
regulated by Part 195
Petroleum
Petroleum Products/Distillates
Supercritical Carbon Dioxide
Anhydrous Ammonia
17
Federal Register Volume 76, Number 87 (Thursday, May 5, 2011)

Effective Date: October 1, 2011
NEW REQUIREMENTS
EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2011
9
Low stress pipeline
Low stress pipeline means a hazardous liquid
pipeline that is operated in its entirety at a
stress level of 20 percent or less of the
specified minimum yield strength of the line
pipe.
19
Amendment 195-96
Eliminates exceptions for low stress
pipelines
Required by PIPES Act 2006
Phase 1 covered large diameter lines
>=8-5/8 inches diameter near USAs
Phase 2 now covers remaining small
diameter lines near USAs and all low-stress
lines any where else
10
§ 195.1 Which pipelines are
covered by this Part?
(a) Covered. Except for the pipelines listed in
paragraph (b) of this Section, this Part applies
to pipeline facilities and the transportation of
hazardous liquids or carbon dioxide
associated with those facilities in or affecting
interstate or foreign commerce, including
pipeline facilities on the Outer Continental
Shelf (OCS). Covered pipelines include, but
are not limited to:

(1) Any pipeline that transports a highly volatile
liquid;
(2) Any pipeline segment that crosses a waterway
currently used for commercial navigation;
(3) Except for a gathering line not covered by
paragraph (a)(4) of this Section, any pipeline located
in a rural or non-rural area of any diameter
regardless of operating pressure;
11
(4) Any of the following onshore
gathering lines used for transportation
of petroleum:
(i) A pipeline located in a non-rural area;
(ii) A regulated rural gathering line as
provided in § 195.11; or
(iii) A pipeline located in an inlet of the
Gulf of Mexico as provided in § 195.413.

(b) Excepted. This Part does not apply
to any of the following:
(1) Transportation of a hazardous liquid
transported in a gaseous state;
through a pipeline by gravity;
12
through any of the following low-stress
pipelines:
(i) A pipeline subject to safety regulations of the U.S.
Coast Guard; or
(ii) A pipeline that serves refining, manufacturing, or
truck, rail, or vessel terminal facilities, if the pipeline is
less than one mile long (measured outside facility
grounds) and does not cross an offshore area or a
waterway currently used for commercial navigation;

(4) Transportation of petroleum
through an onshore rural gathering line
that does not meet the definition of a
“regulated rural gathering line” as
provided in § 195.11. This exception
does not apply to gathering lines in the
inlets of the Gulf of Mexico subject to §
195.413;
13
(5) Transportation of hazardous liquid or carbon
dioxide in an offshore pipeline in state waters where
the pipeline is located upstream from the outlet
flange…
dioxide in a pipeline on the OCS where the pipeline is
located upstream of the point at which operating
responsibility transfers from a producing operator to
a transporting operator;

(7) A pipeline segment upstream (generally
seaward) of the last valve on the last
production facility on the OCS where a
pipeline on the OCS is producer-operated…
(8) Transportation of hazardous liquid or
carbon dioxide through onshore production
(including flow lines), refining, or
manufacturing facilities or storage or in-plant
piping systems associated with such facilities;
14
dioxide:
(i) By vessel, aircraft, tank truck, tank car, or other non-
pipeline mode of transportation; or
(ii) Through facilities located on the grounds of a materials
transportation terminal if the facilities are used exclusively to
transfer hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide between non-
pipeline modes of transportation or between a non-pipeline
mode and a pipeline. These facilities do not include any
device and associated piping that are necessary to control
pressure in the pipeline under § 195.406(b); or

(10) Transportation of carbon dioxide
downstream from the applicable following
point:
(i) The inlet of a compressor used in the injection
of carbon dioxide for oil recovery operations,
(ii) The connection of the first branch pipeline in
the production field where the pipeline transports
carbon dioxide to an injection well
15
(c) Breakout tanks. Breakout tanks subject to this
Part must comply with requirements that apply
specifically to breakout tanks and, to the extent
applicable, with requirements that apply to pipeline
systems and pipeline facilities. If a conflict exists
between a requirement that applies specifically to
breakout tanks and a requirement that applies to
pipeline systems or pipeline facilities, the requirement
that applies specifically to breakout tanks prevails.
(exceptions for anhydrous ammonia).
§195.11 What is a regulated rural

gathering line and what requirements
apply?
(a) Definition. As used in this section, a
regulated rural gathering line means an
onshore gathering line in a rural area that
meets all of the following criteria—
(1) Has a nominal diameter from 6 5/8 inches
(168 mm) to 8 5/8 inches (219.1 mm);
(2) Is located in or within one-quarter mile (.40
km) of an unusually sensitive area as defined in §
195.6; and
16
§195.11 What is a regulated rural
gathering line and what requirements
apply?
(3) Operates at a maximum pressure
established under § 195.406 corresponding
to—
(i) A stress level greater than 20-percent of the
specified minimum yield strength of the line
pipe; or
(ii) If the stress level is unknown or the pipeline
is not constructed with steel pipe, a pressure of
more than 125 psi (861 kPa) gage.
Onshore Petroleum Line

Summary
Gathering lines
Non-rural, covered
Regulated rural, covered
Rural, excepted
Low stress lines
All lines covered
Compliance dates based on category
Rural low-stress excepted from IM.
Transportation lines, covered
Production lines & facilities, excepted
17
Part 192 Gas
35
Gases that are regulated by

Part 192
Natural gas
Flammable gas
Gas that is toxic or corrosive
192.1(a) This part prescribes minimum
safety requirements for pipeline facilities and
the transportation of gas including pipeline
36
18
Exemptions for Gas Pipelines
(1) Offshore gathering of gas in State waters upstream from
the outlet flange of each facility where hydrocarbons are
produced or where produced hydrocarbons are first
separated, dehydrated, or otherwise processed (whichever
facility is furthest downstream);
(2) Pipelines on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) that that are
producer-operated and cross into State waters without
first connecting to a transporting operator's facility on the
OCS, upstream (generally seaward) of the last valve on
the last production facility on the OCS.
• Safety equipment protecting PHMSA regulated pipeline
segments is not excluded.
37

(3) Pipelines on the Outer Continental Shelf
upstream of the point at which operating
responsibility transfers from a producing
operator to a transporting operator;
(4) Onshore gathering of gas—
(i) Through a pipeline that operates at less than 0 psig (0
kPa);
(ii) Through a pipeline that is not a regulated onshore
gathering line (as determined in §192.8); and
(iii) Within inlets of the Gulf of Mexico, except for the
requirements in § 192.612; or
38
19
(5) Any pipeline system that transports only
petroleum gas or petroleum gas/air
mixtures to;
i. Fewer than <10 customers, no portion located
in a public place; or
ii. A single customer (no matter if a portion of
the system is located in a public place)
39
Part 193 Liquefied Natural Gas
40
20
Part 193 Key Definitions
Liquefied natural gas or LNG means natural
gas or synthetic gas having methane (CH4)
as its major constituent which has been
changed to a liquid.
LNG facility means a pipeline facility that is
used for liquefying natural gas or synthetic
gas or transferring, storing, or vaporizing
liquefied natural gas.
41

a) This part prescribes safety standards for LNG facilities used in
the transportation of gas by pipeline that is subject to the
pipeline safety laws (49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) and Part 192 of
this chapter.
b) This part does not apply to:
1) LNG facilities used by ultimate consumers of LNG or natural gas.
2) LNG facilities used in the course of natural gas treatment or
hydrocarbon extraction which do not store LNG.
3) In the case of a marine cargo transfer system and associated
facilities, any matter other than siting pertaining to the system or
facilities between the marine vessel and the last manifold (or in
the absence of a manifold, the last valve) located immediately
before a storage tank.
4) Any LNG facility located in navigable waters (as defined in Section
3(8) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(8)).
42
21
§193.2005 Applicability
a) Regulations in this part governing siting, design, installation, or
construction of LNG facilities (including material incorporated by
reference in these regulations) do not apply to LNG facilities in
existence or under construction when the regulations go into effect.
b) If an existing LNG facility (or facility under construction before March
31, 2000 is replaced, relocated or significantly altered after March 31,
2000, the facility must comply with the applicable requirements of this
part governing, siting, design, installation, and construction, except
that:
1) The siting requirements apply only to LNG storage tanks that are
significantly altered by increasing the original storage capacity or relocated,
and
2) To the extent compliance with the design, installation, and construction
requirements would make the replaced, relocated, or altered facility
incompatible with the other facilities or would otherwise be impractical, the
replaced, relocated, or significantly altered facility may be designed,
installed, or constructed in accordance with the original specifications for
the facility, or in another manner subject to the approval of the
Administrator.
43
Determination of Low Stress
44
22
Key definitions for low-stress liquid line?
Yield Strength (YS): is the strength at which a
material exhibits a specified limiting permanent set or
produces a specified total elongation under load.
Specified Minimum Yield Strength (SMYS): is the

minimum yield strength that the prescribed by
specification under which the pipe is purchased from
the manufacturer
45
46
23
Key definitions for low-stress liquid line?
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP)

maximum pressure at which a pipeline or pipeline
segment may be operated in accordance with
applicable CFR Part 192 (gas).
Maximum Operating Pressure (MOP) as defined in

CFR Part 195 (liquids).
47
Pressure Basic Equation

Barlow’s Formula
P = (2 St/D)
P = pressure in pounds per square inch

S = stress in pounds per square inch
D = Nominal outside diameter of the pipe in
inches
t = Nominal wall thickness of the pipe in inches
48
24
How to Calculate %SMYS
S = DP/2t
STEP 1: Calculate stress level “S” by using the following
D = Nominal outside diameter of the pipe in inches

P = MOP (liquids) or MAOP (gas) in psig
STEP 2: Divide the calculated stress “S” by the

material’s yield strength “YS” and multiply by 100.
%SMYS = (S/YS)(100)
49
%SMYS Example Calculation #1

S = DP/2t
D = Nominal outside diameter = 20 inches
P = MAOP (gas) = 1000 psig
t = Nominal wall thickness = 0.375 inches
Pipe Grade is X-46, YS = 46,000 psi
S = (20)(1000)/(2)(0.375) = 26,700 psi

%SMYS = (S/Y)(100) = (26,700/46,000)(100)
%SMYS = 58%
50
25
%SMYS Example Calculation #2
S = DP/2t
D = Nominal outside diameter = 12 inches
P = MOP (liquid) = 500 psig
Pipe Grade is X-56, YS = 56,000 psi
S = (12)(500)/(2)(0.406) = 7,400 psi

%SMYS = (S/Y)(100) = (7,400/56,000)(100)
%SMYS = 13%
51
Common mistakes in calculating %SMYS

1) Using the design equations from 195.106 or
192.105 and not deleting the design factors
when calculating pipe stress
2) Using operating pressure instead of MAOP
or MOP when calculating pipe stress
3) Incorrectly using pressure ratios like
operating and design pressure
52
26
Design Equation Liquid 195.106
P = (2 St/D) x F x E
P = Design pressure in pounds per square inch
gage.
S = yield strength in pounds per square inch
F = Design factor -(.72, .60 – offshore or navigable
waters, or .54 – cold expansion
E = Seam joint factor)
53
Design Equation Gas 192.105

P = (2 St/D) x F x E x T
P = Internal design pressure in pounds per square
inch gage.
S = yield strength in pounds per square inch
pressure.
F = Design factor
E = Longitudinal joint factor
T = temperature derating factor
54
27
Determining Class Location
Building Count, Clustering,

Boundaries
§192.5 Class Locations

• (a) This section classifies pipeline locations
for purposes of this part. The following
criteria apply to classifications under this
section.
• (1) A "class location unit" is an onshore area that
extends 220 yards (200 meters) on either side of
the centerline of any continuous 1-mile (1.6
kilometers) of pipeline.
• (2) Each separate dwelling unit in a multiple
dwelling unit building is counted as a separate
building intended for human occupancy.
1
• (b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of
this section, pipeline locations are classified
as follows:
• (1) A Class 1 location is:
• (i) An offshore area; or
• (ii) Any class location unit that has 10 or fewer buildings
intended for human occupancy.
• (2) A Class 2 location is any class location unit
that has more than 10 but fewer than 46 buildings
intended for human occupancy.

• (3) A Class 3 location is:
• (i) Any class location unit that has 46 or more buildings
intended for human occupancy; or
• (ii) An area where the pipeline lies within 100 yards (91
meters) of either a building or a small, well-defined
outside area (such as a playground, recreation area,
outdoor theater, or other place of public assembly) that is
occupied by 20 or more persons on at least 5 days a
week for 10 weeks in any 12-month period. (The days
and weeks need not be consecutive.)
2
• (4) A Class 4 location is any class location unit
where buildings with four or more stories above
ground are prevalent.
• (c) The length of Class locations 2, 3, and 4
may be adjusted as follows:
• (1) A Class 4 location ends 220 yards (200
meters) from the nearest building with four or
more stories above ground.
• (2) When a cluster of buildings intended for
human occupancy requires a Class 2 or 3
location, the class location ends 220 yards (200
meters) from the nearest building in the cluster.
Class Location Unit

• Having a single four or more story building within
220 yards of a gas pipeline does not require
upgrading to Class 4 requirements because
paragraph (e) states in part: "where buildings with
four or more stories above ground are prevalent."
The use of "prevalent" indicates that they are
common or that there are more than one such
building in the area. Therefore, a single four or
more story building would not cause an area to be
designated a Class 4 location.
3
Class Location Determination
220 yards
1 mile
Class 1 220 yards
M.P. 0 M.P. 1 M.P. 2 M.P. 3
End to End Mile – the Wrong Way to do class location
M.P. = Mile Post
56
Class 1 Class 3
M.P. 0 M.P. 1 M.P. 2 M.P. 3
4
Class 1 Class 3 Class 1
M.P. 0 M.P. 1 M.P. 2 M.P. 3
Class 1
M.P. 0 M.P. 1 M.P. 2 M.P. 3
Continuous Sliding Mile – The Right Way
5
Continuous Sliding Mile
Class 1 Class 2
14
Class 1
Class 2
When class locations overlap, the higher classification prevails.
M.P. 0 M.P. 1 M.P. 2 M.P. 3

56
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
6
48
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 3

Class 2
40
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 3
Class 2
7
Class 2
24
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 3
Class 2
Class 2

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 2
12
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 3
Class 2
Class 2
Class 2
8
Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 2 Class 1
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 3
Class 2
Class 2
Class 2
Class 1
Continuous Sliding Mile - the right way to do class location

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 2 Class 1
9
Adjustment of Class Location Length:
Clustering
The length of Class locations 2, 3, and 4
may be adjusted as follows:
1) A Class 4 location ends 220 yards from the
nearest building with four or more stories above
ground.
2) When a cluster of buildings intended for human
occupancy requires a Class 2 or 3 location, the
class location ends 220 yards from the nearest
building in the cluster.
19
Clustering
Class 3 (Established by Sliding Mile)
220 yards 220 yards 220 yards 220 yards
10
Clustering
Clustering
New House
11
Clustering
220 yards 220 yards
Class 3 Class 1
Clustering
• Your application of paragraph (f) of §192.5, to restrict
the boundaries of Class 2 and Class 3 locations
created by a cluster of buildings in otherwise Class 1
situations such as you portray in your drawing is not
correct. Because the two clusters portrayed are
within a continuous 1-mile length of pipeline, they
affect one another and in the example you give would
cause the class location to be Class 3 to a point of
220 yards beyond the extremities of the two
"combined" clusters.
12
Clustering
Clustering
13
Boundary Adjustment of Class
Locations
Two Methods
"perpendicular/parallel method"
"arc method”
27
Arc Method for Adjustment of

Class Location
Interpretations in 192.5 #17 & #18 –

December 1996
Consequently, we ……find both the "arc
method" and the "perpendicular/parallel
method" to be acceptable for
determining the 220 yard boundary for
the cluster of buildings in § 192.5(f)
28
14
Adjustment of Class Locations (192.5)
with the Perpendicular / Parallel Method
220 yd
CLASS 1 CLASS 2 CLASS 1

220 yard extension 220 yard extension
220 yd Of Class 2 Segment Of Class 2 Segment
220 yd = 660 ft boundaries Pipeline Centerline
(not to scale)
29
Example of Arc Method Application
Dwelling “A” is end of Class 3 Area Yellow Line represents length of

class extension - much less than Perpendicular-Parallel Method
220 yard = 660 feet boundary

A
(not to scale)
Pipeline
30
15
Dwelling “B” is end of Class 3 Area - Blue Line represents length of

class extension - less than Perpendicular-Parallel Method
B
(not to scale)
Pipeline
31

Dwelling “C” is end of Class 3 Area - Red Line represents length of
class extension as the dwelling or building approaches the center line of
the pipeline. The result from the Arc Method approaches the same value
as the Perpendicular-Parallel Method
(not to scale)
Pipeline
Approximately 220 yards

32
16
Case 1: Dwelling “C” is end of Class 3 Area ( A & B are not present):
Red Line represents length of class extension
Case 2: Dwelling “B” is end of Class 3 Area ( A & C are not present):
Blue Line represents length of class extension
Case 3: Dwelling “A” is end of Class 3 Area ( B & C are not present):
Yellow Line represents length of class extension

A
B
(not to scale)
Pipeline
33
Arc Method versus Perpendicular/Parallel Method

Difference in Class Extension
Length of
Extension (ft)
Distance from Pipeline (ft) Arc Method Perp./Parallel Method Difference (ft)
0 660 660 0
50 658 660 2
100 652 660 8
150 643 660 17
200 629 660 31
250 611 660 49
300 588 660 72
330 572 660 88
350 560 660 100
400 525 660 135
450 483 660 177
500 431 660 229
550 365 660 295
600 275 660 385
650 114 660 546
655 81 660 579
657 63 660 597
659 36 660 624 34
17
Impacts of Increasing to Higher
Class Locations
Frequency
Leak Surveys
Transmission Line Patrolling
Depth of Cover Requirements
Design Factor
Design Factor 0.72 0.60 0.50 0.40

Class Location 1 2 3 4
35
Class Location Implication on Calculated

Wall Thickness (one example)
P D E T F S t (in.)
1440 30 1.0 1.0 0.72 65,000 0.462
1440 30 1.0 1.0 0.60 65,000 0.554
1440 30 1.0 1.0 0.50 65,000 0.665
1440 30 1.0 1.0 0.40 65,000 0.831
Design Pressure = 1440 psig, Yield Strength = 65,000 psig, Diameter = 30 in., E = 1.0, T
= 1.0
36
18
Key Interpretations
Answers to Operator Questions
Areas within 100 yards

• April 6, 2007
• "For those areas within 100 yards of the pipeline, is
the intent of 192.5(b)(3)(ii) to include, as Class 3
locations, building(s) such as a convenience store,
i.e. Circle K, 7-11, etc., and video poker truck stops
where persons may frequent on a daily basis?"
• Yes, the intent of § 192.5(b)(3)(ii) is to include
convenience stores, video poker truck stops and
similar buildings in Class 3 locations where these
facilities lie within 100 yards of the pipeline.
19
20 Persons
• "What is the interpretation under
192.5(b)(3)(ii) as to the 20 persons, such as
all 20 present at one time or cumulative
throughout the day?"
• Under § 192.5(b)(3)(ii), the 20 or more
persons must all be present at the same time.
However, this does not require the
continuous presence of 20 or more people.
For example, the minimum requirement is
met if 20 people are present at a convenience
store at any one time during the day.
Four or more stories

• “What is the definition and intent under 192.5(b)(4),
where it addresses ‘buildings with four or more
stories above ground are prevalent’? If you have 10
buildings along a pipeline, a downtown area for
example, and 5 or less of the buildings are four or
more stories, would this be defined as prevalent and
constitute being a Class 4 location?”
• In the example you use, ten buildings in a downtown
area with five or more buildings four stories or more
would meet the definition of prevalent (i.e.,
prevailing).
20
Parking garages
• “Are parking garages, open or closed,
considered to be buildings intended to be
utilized for determination of class location
under 192.(b)(3)(ii) and 192.5(b)(4)?”
• Though we do not define "buildings" in 49
CFR Part 192, we believe open or closed
parking garages are buildings for class
location determinations using any commonly
accepted definition of buildings.
MAOP review
• "In addition, 49 CFR 192.619(a)(3) allows an
operator to establish an MAOP based upon
the 5-year window for older systems prior to
July 1, 1970. Once that has been established
and documented and a class location study is
performed resulting in a class location
change from what it was on July 1, 1970,
does the operator have to incorporate a class
location factor for revision of the MAOP
established by the 5-year window? Our
contention is that the operator does not."
21
MAOP review
• If a class location study identifies a pipeline
segment with a hoop stress corresponding to
an established MAOP that is not
commensurate with the present class
location, the operator must confirm or revise
the MAOP of the pipeline segment using one
of the three methods in § 192.611(a).
Operators must use all the applicable class
location factors wherever called for in each of
these methods.
Arc method
• We have looked into your statement on the
extent of use of the "arc method" and found
that it has been used for many years by a
large number of interstate operators.
Consequently, we have reconsidered our
interpretation in my letter of January 30,
1995, and find both the "arc method" and the
"perpendicular/parallel method" to be
acceptable for determining the 220 yard
boundary for the cluster of buildings in §
192.5(f).
• 12/16/1996
22
Trail systems
• Your question concerned allowing a trail system on a natural
gas pipeline right-of-way.
• Although a trail system bears some resemblance to a "small,
well-defined outside area that is occupied by 20 or more
people," it differs in a number of significant aspects. In
particular, it appears that a trail used by hikers, bicycles, horses,
cross country skiers, etc., would not be occupied by 20 or more
people in a small and well-defined area at the same time.
Furthermore, such a trail system would not be basically similar
to a playground, recreation area, outdoor theater, or other place
of public assembly. Therefore, the trail system would not
require a change in class location.
• 9/27/1996
Outdoor areas
• …three segments of gas pipelines in Rowan County,
Kentucky that pass within 100 yards of an Outdoor
Field Study Area used by the Rowan County School
System. You asked if these pipeline segments are in
a Class 3 location as defined by 49 CFR 192.5(d)(2).
• …it appears that the Outdoor Field Study Area is not
occupied at least 5 days a week for any period of the
year. Therefore, the pipeline segments are not in a
Class 3 location under §192.5(d)(2).
• 6/3/1991
23
Motels
• … has a transmission line near a
Holiday Inn was discussed with Furrow.
The motel is not within 100 yards of the
motel, but it may be within 220 yards.
• The question is: Should the motel
rooms be counted as dwellings units,
similar to apartments, or as a single
building?
Motels
• In Furrow's opinion (emphasis) there is probably a
distinction between a dwelling unit, which serves as a
more permanent place of residence, and a motel
room, which is generally occupied for a short term.
He does not feel that the motel room would be
classified as a dwelling unit for the purposes of the
regulations.
• A motel alone would have to be within 100 yards of a
pipeline and meet the occupancy requirements of
192.5(d)(2) to establish a class 3 location.
• NOTE: THIS IS AN OPINION, NOT AN
INTERPRETATION. IT COULD BE REVERSED.
• 7/6/1989
24
Clustering
• Your application of paragraph (f) of §192.5, to restrict
the boundaries of Class 2 and Class 3 locations
created by a cluster of buildings in otherwise Class 1
situations such as you portray in your drawing is not
correct. Because the two clusters portrayed are
within a continuous 1-mile length of pipeline, they
affect one another and in the example you give would
cause the class location to be Class 3 to a point of
220 yards beyond the extremities of the two
"combined" clusters.
• 7/30/1982
Prevalent, four or more stories

• Having a single four or more story building
within 220 yards of a gas pipeline does not
require upgrading to Class 4 requirements
because paragraph (e) states in part: "where
buildings with four or more stories above
ground are prevalent." The use of "prevalent"
indicates that they are common or that there
are more than one such building in the area.
Therefore, a single four or more story building
would not cause an area to be designated a
Class 4 location.
• 7/30/1982
25
Building
• Subparagraph (f)(1) uses "building" in
the singular because it is referring to the
nearest building in group or cluster to
which the boundary adjustment of 220
yards applies in relation to other
dwelling units.
• 7/30/1982
Review period
• By the plain meaning of this rule, an operator
has 18 months from the time a change in
class location occurs to complete the
confirmation or revision. As you have
indicated by alternative (1) above, a change
in class location occurs when a structure is
completed which results in a new class
location. Consequently, the 18-month period
begins upon completion of a structure which
results in a new class location.
• 5/12/1978
26
Human occupancy
• Intended for "human occupancy" is
interpreted to mean that the building
concerned is used for a purpose
involving the presence of humans.
• 7/5/1977
Short term occupancy

• …whether a pipeline within 100 yards of a
fairgrounds which is occupied by more than 20
persons a day for only a 6-day period annually would
be in a Class 3 location under §192.5(d)(2).
• …tractor-pull area which is occupied by more than 20
persons a day for only a 3-day period annually
• …122 feet of a church which is occupied on Sundays
and Tuesdays by less than 20 persons each day but
has a daily attendance of more than 20 persons
during an annual one week revival would be in a
Class 3 location.
27
Short term occupancy
• …outside areas which are covered by the definition,
i.e., playground, recreation area, outdoor theater,
indicate that the definition is intended to apply to
places where 20 or more persons assemble more
frequently than one week annually.
• Therefore, usage of the fairgrounds, tractor-pull area,
or church in the way you have described would not
cause a pipeline within 100 yards thereof to be in a
Class 3 location under §192.5(d)(2)
• 9/14/1976
Plant, industrial facilities

• OPSO analysis of your plant diagram and
corresponding description of facilities
indicates that all of your eight buildings or
units are intended for human occupancy.
The Administration Building and the Parking
Lot lie within 100 yards of the pipeline and
have a normal human occupancy of more
than 20 persons. Therefore, this area
appears to be in at least a Class 3 location
(refer to Section 192.5(d)(2)).
• 4/21/1976
28
Advisory Bulletin. ADB-02-02
• Annual Report for Gas Transmission
and Gathering Systems now includes a
section to report miles of pipe by class
location
• Form PHMSA F 7100.2-1 (12/05)
History of Class Location
29
Origins of Class Location
• 1952 ASME B31.1.8 allowed 72% SMYS in
all areas except inside incorporated limits of
cities and towns
• Many operators used heavy wall pipe in
populated areas to reduce stress to 50%
SMYS
• B31.1.8 Committee recognized the need for
relating pipeline location to operating
pressure for the safety of the public
Class Location Area Defined

• 1955 – subgroup appointed to study
population vs. pressure
• Flew many pipeline routes to review current
practices
• Recommended width of area for for
consideration should be1/4 mile on either
side of pipeline
• Easily identified on aerial photographs
• Representative of pipeline routes and activities
around the pipeline
30
Building Density
• Determined that 20 dwellings per mile had a
negligible effect on pipeline (used a one mile
and 10 mile index)
• Committee set 20 dwellings per mile as
maximum density for 72 % SMYS operation
• Recognized that as population increased,
design or operating pressure should be
changed appropriately
Four Class Locations

• 72% SMYS – 20 or fewer buildings in
the class location zone
• 60% SMYS – areas between rural and
urban, road and railroad crossings
• 50% SMYS – inside limits of
incorporated cities or towns
• 40% SMYS – densely populated areas
31
DOT Class Location
• 1970 – DOT adopts Part 192
• 192.5 describes the class locations
• Right-of-way width for determining class
location changed to 1/8 mile on either
side of pipeline
• Building count was also modified
Reduction in Width of ROW

• OPS conducted survey and reviewed failure
reports
• Determined that past incidents had not
extended even 1/4 mile
• Considered impact of increased population
and potential risk within 1/8 mile of pipeline
• Concluded reduction in width would not have
an adverse impact on safety
32
Change in Building Count
• Buildings intended for human occupancy
• Reduced number of buildings in Class 1 from
20 to 10
• Class 2 – any one mile section more than 10
but less than 46 (this was the area between
rural and city)
• Class 3 – Any one mile section with 46 or
more buildings
• Class 4 – Any one mile section where
buildings with 4 or more stories are prevalent
Additional Changes
• Removed 10 mile population density
index
• Established class location unit as a one
mile length
• Established 18 months to confirm or
revise MAOP after a class location
change
33
Amendments
• 1976 – added offshore as Class 1
• 1987 – Rural Church Rule – Class 3 location
is
• …46 or more…
• An area where the pipeline lies within 100 yards of
either a building or a small, well-defined outside
area (such as a playground, recreation area,
outdoor theater, or other place of public assembly)
that is occupied by 20 or more persons on at least
5 days a week for 10 weeks in any 12-month
period. (The days and weeks need not be
consecutive.)
Amendments
• 1996 – rewrote entire section for clarity and to
minimize the possibility that a pipeline is
classified higher than necessary. This
clarified the cluster exception.
• 1998 – added metric equivalents
• [Part - 192 - Org, Aug. 19, 1970, as amended by
Amdt. 192-27, 41 FR 34598, Aug. 16, 1976; Amdt.
192-56, 52 FR 32924, Sept. 1, 1987, Amdt 192-78,
61 FR 28770, June 6, 1996], Amdt. 192-78, 61 FR
28770, July 3, 1996, Amdt. 192-85 , 63 FR 37500,
July 13, 1998]
34
MAOP
Pressures
MAOP
MOP
OP
MAOP
"Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure"
means the maximum pressure at which a
pipeline or segment of a pipeline may be
operated under this part.
§192.3
MOP
"Maximum Actual Operating Pressure"
means the maximum pressure that
occurs during normal operations over a
period of one year.
§192.3
OP
"Operating Pressure" means the pressure on
the pipeline at any given time.
Usually the setpoint of the Regulator
§192.619 - All Pipelines

Lowest of the following:
(a)(1) Design
(a)(2) Test Pressure
(a)(3) MOP during the 5 years preceding July 1, 1970
(a)(4) Maximum Safe Pressure determined by the Operator

(a)(1) Design
Design of Pipe and Components
Pipe
For Steel - §192.105
For Plastic - §192.121
Components
Manufacturers Rating
§192.105 - Design of Steel Pipe
P = (2St/D)(F)(E)(T)
P = Design Pressure
S = Yield Strength
D = Outside Diameter
t = Wall Thickness
F = Design factor - §192.111
E = Longitudinal joint factor - §192.113
T = Temperature derating factor - §192.115
Converted or Uprated Lines

If any variable necessary to determine the design
pressure under the design formula is unknown, one
of the following is used;
Eighty percent of the first test pressure that

produces yield under N5.0 of ASME B31.8; or
If the pipe is 12.750 or less and is not tested to yield,

200psig.
§192.619(a)(1)
Pipe Specifications
API 5L
Grade B
8"
.322" wt.
P = 2St/D
P = (2)(35,000)(.322)/8.625
P = 2613 psi
Equivalent Pressure
at 100% SMYS
§192.111
P=2St (F)
D
For a Class 3 Location
P= (2)(35,000)(.322) (0.50)
8.625
P= 1307 psi
E = Longitudinal
Joint Factor - §192.113
T = Temperature Derating
factor - §192.115
Components
1000 WOG Valve
ANSI Class 300 Flange
ANSI Class 600 Valve

Components
1000 WOG Valve - 1000 psi SPEC

S
ANSI Class 300 Flange - 720 psi
ANSI Class 600 Valve - 1440 psi
Design
Components = 720 psi
Pipe = 1307 psi

(a)(1) Design = 720 psi
Testing - Steel > 100 psi

Class Installed Installed Covered
location before after under
(Nov. 12, (Nov. 11, §192.14
1970) 1970)
1 1.1 1.1 1.25
2 1.25 1.25 1.25
3 1.4 1.5 1.5
4 1.4 1.5 1.5
§192.619(a)(2)(ii) See 192.503
Test Pressure / Factor
Test Pressure - 1964 = 1500 psi

For Class 3 -
1500/1.4 = 1071 psi

(a)(2) Test Pressure = 1071 psi
(a)(3) MOP during the 5 years preceding July 1,

1970
(a)(4) Maximum Safe Pressure determined by

the Operator
MOP
5 years preceding applicable date (7/1/70
or dates for gathering lines)
Unless:
Tested in accordance §192.619(a)(2) after
July 1, 1965
Uprated in accordance with Subpart K of

this part.
MOP
Operating Charts for 1968 - 850 psi
(a)(3) MOP = 850 psi
(a)(4) Maximum Safe Pressure determined by

the Operator
Maximum Safe Pressure

Considering:
History
Corrosion
Actual Operating
Pressure
§192.619(b)
If used:
Must provide Overpressure

Protection as required by
§192.195
§192.619(c)
Notwithstanding
The requirements on pressure restrictions in this section do
not apply in the following instance. An operator may
operate a segment of pipeline found to be in satisfactory
condition, considering its operating and maintenance
history, at the highest actual operating pressure to which
the segment was subjected during the 5 years preceding the
applicable date in the second column of the table in
paragraph (a)(3) of this section. An operator must still
comply with §192.611.
§192.619(c)
Notwithstanding
Design = 720 psi

Test Pressure = 1071 psi
MOP = 850 psi
%SMYS Example Calculation

S = DP/2t
D = Nominal outside diameter = 8.625 inches
P = MAOP (gas) = 850 psig
Pipe Grade is B, YS = 35,000 psi
S = (8.625)(850)/(2)(0.322) = 11,383 psi
%SMYS = (S/Y)(100) = (11,383/35,000)(100)
%SMYS = 32%
850(MAOP)/2613(Barlow)=32%
30
(a)(1) Design
Plastic

(a)(1) Design

Design of Pipe and Components
Pipe
For Steel - §192.105
For Plastic - §192.121
Components
Manufacturers Rating
§192.121 - Design of Plastic Pipe (old)

OLD Formula P = 2S x 0.32
Until 1/23/09
(SDR-1)
P = Design Pressure
S = Long Term Hydrostatic Strength - estimated tensile
hoop stress that when applied continuously failure of
the pipe at 100,000 hours (11.43 years) - (HDB -
Hydrostatic Design Base)
SDR = Standard Dimension Ratio = outside diameter
/wall thickness
§192.121 - Design of Plastic Pipe (new)
NEW Formula P = 2S x 0.32 (or 0.40)
After 1/23/09 (SDR-1)
P = Design Pressure
S = HDB in accordance with listed specification at listed
temperature.
SDR = Standard Dimension Ratio = outside diameter
/wall thickness
0.40 for 4” or less, SDR 11 or greater PA-11 produced
after Jan. 23, 2009
§192.123 Design limitations for plastic pipe.
Design pressure may not exceed 100 psig

in distribution or Class 3 & 4, EXCEPT –
Pipe produced after July 14, 2005 may be
designed for 125 psig
PE 2406 or 3408
< 12 inches
Design pressure determined under 192.121
Some temperature limitations
Hydrostatic Design Base
Piping Material 73 ºF 100 ºF 120 ºF 140 ºF

2406 1250 1250 1000 800
3408 1600 1250 1000 800
Pipe Specifications
PE 3408
ASTM-D2513
4"
SDR = 11
Ambient Temp. 84 ºF
P = 2S/(R-1) x 0.32
P= (2)(1250) x 0.32 = 80 psi

(11-1)
P = 2S/(R-1) x 0.32
P73 ºF= (2)(1600)/(11-1)x0.32 = 102 psi
P100 ºF= (2)(1250)/(11-1)x0.32 = 80 psi
P120 ºF= (2)(1000)/(11-1)x0.32 = 64 psi
P140 ºF= (2)(800)/(11-1)x0.32 = 51 psi

Design Pressure
SDR = 11


For Plastic - Test Pressure / 1.5
Test Pressure - 1964 = 95 psi
95/1.5 = 63 psi

(a)(4) Maximum Safe Pressure determined by the

Operator
MOP
5 years preceding applicable date (7/1/70
or dates for gathering lines)
Unless:
Tested in accordance §192.619(a)(2) after
July 1, 1965
Uprated in accordance with Subpart K of

this part.
MOP
Operating Charts for 1968 - 45 psi
(a)(3) MOP = 45 psi
(a)(4) Maximum Safe Pressure determined by the

Operator

Considering:
History
Leakage
Actual Operating
Pressure
For Distribution
From §192.619 carry over

determined MAOP
§192.619(c)?
High Pressure Distribution §192.621
Low Pressure Distribution §192.623
High Pressure Distribution System
Means a distribution
system in which the
gas pressure in the
main is higher than
the pressure provided
to the customer.
§192.621 MAOP: High-Pressure distribution systems.
(a)(1) Design
(a)(2) 60 psi - unless service lines equipped with pressure

limiting devices meeting §192.197(c)
(a)(1) Design



§192.619(a)(3) 45 psi
§192.621 MAOP: High-Pressure Distribution Systems
-Additional Limitations-
(a)(3) 25 psi - Cast Iron Pipe if there are Unreinforced Bell

and Spigot Joints
(a)(4) The Pressure Limits of Joints

(Must provide Overpressure Protection per §192.195)
Low Pressure Distribution System
Means a distribution
system in which the gas
pressure in the main is
substantially the same as
the pressure provided to the
customer.
§192.623 Low-Pressure Distribution Systems:
Maximum and Minimum
Allowable Operating Pressure
No person may operate a

low-pressure distribution
system at a pressure high
enough to make unsafe the
operation of any connected
and properly adjusted low-
pressure gas burning
equipment.
§192.623 Low-Pressure Distribution Systems:

Maximum and Minimum
No person may operate a low
pressure distribution system at
a pressure lower than the
minimum pressure at which
the safe and continuing
operation of any connected
and properly adjusted low-
pressure gas burning
equipment can be assured.
Part 195
Maximum Operating Pressure
§195.406
Except for surges, pressure cannot exceed any of the
following:
(a)(1) design pressure of pipe
(a)(2) design pressure of component
(a)(3) 80% of test pressure from Subpart E
(a)(4) 80% of factory test for components if exempt
(a)(5) 80% of highest pressure or other test
(b) 110% of above during surges
Design pressure of pipe
See 195.106, Internal design pressure
P = (2 St/D) x E x F
P = Internal design pressure
S = Yield strength
t = Nominal wall thickness
D = Nominal outside diameter
E = Seam joint factor
F = A design factor of 0.72, .60 on platforms, .54 cold expansion pipe
that is heated
If any factors unknown see 195.106(b)-(e)
Components
Design pressure of component.
If not tested (exempt under 195.305, single

component replacement), then 80% of
factory test or rating.
Pressure Test
Use 80% of Subpart E test. Pressure must be at least
125% of MOP and held for at least 4 continuous
hours
or
For older lines not tested under Subpart E (see
§§195.302(b)(1) and (b)(2)(i)) 80% of documented
test pressure or highest operating pressure held for 4
or more continuous hours.
Operator Qualification
Review of Rule
Options for Qualification
Commercially Available External
Programs
Advantages and Disadvantages
Key Questions/Considerations
1
Final Rule published August 27, 1999

Subpart N in DOT 192 (192.801-809)
Subpart G in DOT 195 (195.501-509)
Subparts N and G are nearly identical
Only difference terminology Incident vs. Accident
Amended via Direct Final Rule
Effective July 1, 2005
2
Qualification of Pipeline Personnel
Original Amendments
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION – 49 CFR Parts 192 and
195, Amendments 192-86; 195-67
SUMMARY: This final rule requires pipeline operators
to develop and maintain a written qualification
program for individuals performing covered tasks on
pipeline facilities. The intent of this qualification rule
is to ensure a qualified work force and to reduce the
probability and consequence of incidents caused by
human error. This final rule creates new subparts in
the gas and hazardous liquid pipeline safety
regulations. It establishes qualification requirements
for individuals performing covered tasks.
3
Operator Qualification Scope
192.801, 195.501
(a) minimum requirements for operator

qualification of individuals performing
covered tasks on a pipeline facility.
4
Operator Qualification Scope
Criteria for Covered Tasks
(b) a covered task is an activity,

identified by the operator, that:
(1) Is performed on a pipeline facility;
(2) Is an operations or maintenance task;
(3) Is performed as a requirement of this
part (192/195); and
(4) Affects the operation or integrity of the
pipeline.
5
OQ Key Definitions
192.803, 195.503
Abnormal operating condition means a

condition identified by the operator that may
indicate a malfunction of a component or
deviation from normal operations that may:
(a) Indicate a condition exceeding design limits; or
(b) Result in a hazard(s) to persons, property, or
the environment.
6
OQ Key Definitions
192.803, 195.503
Qualified means that an individual has been

evaluated and can:
(a) Perform assigned covered tasks; and
(b) Recognize and react to abnormal operating
conditions.
7
OQ Key Definitions
192.803, 195.503
Evaluation means a process, established and

documented by the operator, to determine an
individual’s ability to perform a covered task
by any of the following:
(a) Written examination;
(b) Oral examination;
(c) Work performance history review;
(d) Observation during:
(1) Performance on the job,
(2) On the job training, or
(3) Simulations; or
(e) Other forms of assessment.
8
General
192.809, 195.509
Operators must have a written qualification program by

April 27, 2001.
The program must be available for review.
Operators must complete the qualification of individuals
performing covered tasks by October 28, 2002.
Work performance history may not be used as a sole
evaluation method (after October 28, 2002)
Observation of on-the-job performance may not be used
as the sole method of evaluation (after December 16,
2004)
9
Written Qualification Program
192.805, 195.505
The program shall include provisions to:

(a) Identify covered tasks;
(b) Ensure through evaluation that individuals
performing covered tasks are qualified;
(c) Allow individuals that are not qualified pursuant to
this subpart to perform a covered task if directed and
observed by an individual that is qualified;
(d) Evaluate an individual if the operator has reason to
believe that the individual’s performance of a covered
task contributed to an (incident)/(accident) as
defined in Part (191)/(195);
10
Written Qualification Program (cont.)
192.805, 195.505
(e) Evaluate an individual if the operator has

reason to believe that the individual is no
longer qualified to perform a covered task;
(f) Communicate changes that affect covered
tasks to individuals performing those covered
tasks;
(g) Identify those covered tasks and the
intervals at which evaluation of the individual’s
qualifications is needed;
11
Written Qualification Program (cont.)
192.805, 195.505
(h) Provide training to ensure that individuals

performing covered tasks have the
necessary knowledge and skills to perform
the tasks in a manner that ensures the safe
operation of pipeline facilities; and
(i) Notify the Administrator or a State Agency

if the operator significantly modifies the
program.
12
OQ Recordkeeping – Each Operator Shall
Maintain Records (192.807, 195.507)
(a) Qualification records shall include:

Identification of qualified individual(s)
The covered tasks the individual is qualified to
perform;
Date(s) of current qualification; and
Qualification method(s).
(b) Records supporting an individual’s current

qualification shall be maintained while the
individual is performing the covered task. Records
of prior qualification and records of individuals no
longer performing covered tasks shall be retained
for a period of five years.
13
Advisory Bulletin ADB-06-01
Excavation damage continues to be one of the
three leading causes of pipeline damage
Series of serious incidents from 2004 through 2005
Operators are damaging their own pipelines
Operators must ensure all procedures and
processes to perform excavation and backfilling
are followed.
Only qualified personnel must oversee all
marking, trenching, and backfilling operations.
14
Although excavation is not explicitly addressed
in 49 CFR parts 192 and 195, excavation is
considered a covered task under the pipeline
operator qualifications regulations
Operators and contractors must be qualified to
perform pipeline excavation activities.
A qualified individual is one who has been
evaluated and can perform assigned covered
tasks and can recognize and react appropriately
to abnormal conditions.
15
Operator Qualification Options
Commercially Available Programs
Allow an Operator to use an external entity for
qualification instead of internal company
developed materials and systems
16
Commercially Available OQ Programs
National Center for Construction and Engineering

Research (NCCER)
Midwestern Energy Association (MEA)
OQSG
Veriforce
Enbridge
eWebOQ
National Association of Corrosion Engineers
ISNetworld* (ISN)
17
External OQ Programs
Pros
Generally lower cost of developing and maintaining
program (spread across many Operators)
Potential for high degree of standardization of tasks
and qualification methods
Contractor and Operator
Across entire industry
External organization must focus on upcoming rule
changes and proactively manage change
18
External OQ Programs
Cons
Operator has lower degree of control
(material content, management of change,
covered task definitions, etc.)
Operator’s OQ Program may need
modification (need to be able to equate
covered tasks)
Potentially generic (developed for broad
application)
19
Internal Operator OQ Programs
Pros
Operator has highest degree of control
material content
management of change
covered task definitions
Can be more focused and specific (vs. generic)
Cons
Cost of developing and maintaining program
Potential variation between Operator and
Contractor programs (unless available to your
contractors)
20
Key Questions/Considerations
1) Who is responsible to assure that Contractors are
qualified?
2) Should your OQ Program define what is acceptable
qualification for your contractors?
3) What commercially available programs will you accept for
Contractors (if any)?
4) Will you review and approve Contractor’s internal OQ
programs?
5) What method will you use to assure specific Contractors
on your work site are qualified?
6) Is there a liability or other potential benefit to using a
commercially available or industry standard program?
7) What are typical qualification schemes in current use?
21
API/COOQ Approved Liquid/Gas Covered Tasks List Revision Date 03/04/05
with references to NCCER Pipeliner Training and Assessment Materials
Written Assessments
E & I Pipeline Technician
Field and Control Center
Gas Pipeline Operations

Note 1 - Workers must be qualified on either "General" or "Control Center" Abnormal Operating Conditions, (AOC) or both.
Non Destructive Testing
Conditions-(Control Ctr)
Corrosion Preven. Field
Operations Technician
Pipeline Maintenance
Tech 1-Measurement
Corrosion Prevention
Conditions-(General)
Abmormal Operating
Abmormal Operating
Contren
Mechanical Pipeline
Abnormal Operating
Tech 1-Installation
Field Technician 2
Field Technician 3
Gas Maintenance
Conditions-(Gas)
Performance
Verifications
Learning Series
Technician
Technician
Technician
Note 2 - Abnormal Operating Conditions are incorporated within each task performance verification.
Task #
Level
Type
Task API Covered Tasks and Sub-Tasks Module #
AOC L Abnormal Operating Conditions (General) 1 66102 X Note 2

AOC L Abnormal Operating Conditions (Control) 1 65102 X Note 2
AOC G Abnormal Operating Conditions (Gas) 1 67107 X Note 2
CORROSION
1 L/G Conduct Annual Surveys or Electrically Inspect Unprotected Bare Pipe Split
1.1 Measure structure-to-soil potentials 1 61108 X PV011
1.2 Conduct close interval survey 2 61205 X PV012
1.3 Test to detect interference 2 61203 X PV013
1.4 Inspect and perform electrical test of bonds 2 61205 X PV014
1.5 Inspect and test isolation devices 1 61108 X PV015
2 L/G Maintain Test Leads
2.1 Inspect and verify test lead continuity X PV021
2.2 Repair damaged test leads 1 61109 X PV022
2.3 Install test leads by non-exothermic welding methods X PV023
2.4 Install test leads by exothermic welding methods X PV024
3 L/G Inspect Rectifier
3.1 Obtain a voltage and current output reading from a rectifier 1 61108 X PV031
3.2 Check for proper operation of a rectifier X X PV032
4 L/G Maintain Rectifier
4.1 Troubleshoot rectifier bond connections X PV041
2 61202
4.2 Repair or replace defective rectifier components X PV042
4.3 Adjustment of rectifier X PV043
5 L/G Inspect Buried Pipe When Exposed (Also in Maintenance 62204)
5.1 Inspect for physical damage on buried or submerged pipe X PV051
1 61105
5.2 Inspect for external corrosion on buried or submerged pipe X X PV052
5.3 Inspect the condition of external coating on buried or submerged pipe X X PV053
7 L/G Inspect and Perform Prevention Methods for Atmospheric Corrosion Split
7.1 Visual inspection of atmospheric coating 1 61106 X PV071
7.2 Prepare surface for atmospheric coating using hand and power tools 1 61106 X X PV072
7.3 Perform water pressure cleaning 1 61106 X X PV073
7.4 Prepare surface for atmospheric coating by abrasive blasting 2 61207 X X PV074
7.5 Apply atmospheric coating using hand application methods 1 61106 X PV075
7.6 Apply atmospheric coating using spray applications 2 61208 X PV076
7.7 Use coating inspection tools 2 61206 X PV077
8 L/G Measure Wall Thickness
8.1 Measure pit depth with pit gauge X PV081
1 61104
8.2 Measure wall thickness with handheld ultrasonic meter X PV082
8.3 Measure corroded area X PV083
9 L/G Cathodic Protection Remediation Split
9.1 Install bonds 2 61203 X PV091
9.2 Install galvanic anodes 2 61201 X PV092
9.3 Install rectifiers 2 61201 X PV093
9.4 Install impressed current groundbeds 2 61201 X PV094
9.5 Repair shorted casings (Also in Maintenance 62304) 2 61204 X PV095
10 L/G Monitor for Internal Corrosion
10.1 Insert and remove coupons 1 61111 X PV101
10.2 Monitor probes (on-line) X PV102
11 L/G Perform Internal Corrosion Remediation X PV110
1 61111
No Subtasks
1
Written Assessments

Tech 1-Measurement
Abmormal Operating
Abmormal Operating
Contren
Mechanical Pipeline
Abnormal Operating
Tech 1-Installation
Field Technician 2
Field Technician 3
Gas Maintenance
Conditions-(Gas)
Performance
Verifications
Learning Series
Technician
Technician
Technician
Task #
Level
Type
12 L/G Inspect Internal Pipe Surface X PV120

1 61110
No Subtasks
13 L/G Apply and Repair External Coating on Buried or Submerged Pipe Split X X
13.1 Prepare surface for coating using hand and power tools 1 61106 PV131
13.2 Perform water pressure cleaning 1 61106 PV132
13.3 Prepare surface for coating by abrasive blasting 2 61207 PV133
13.4 Apply coating using hand application methods 1 61107 PV134
13.5 Apply coating using spray applications 2 61208 PV135
MAINTENANCE
9 L/G 9.5 Repair shorted casings (Also in Corrosion 61204) 2 62304 X PV095
14 L/G Place and Maintain Line Markers X
14.1 Locate line (Also in Corrosion 61103) PV141
14.2 Install marker 1 62106 PV142
14.3 Inspect and maintain marker PV143
14.4 Inspect and maintain aerial line markers PV144
15 L/G Inspect Surface Conditions of Right-of-Way X
15.1 Visual inspection of the surface 2 62201 PV151
15.2 Reporting protocols PV152
16 L/G Inspect Navigable Waterway Crossing X
16.1 Use of probing equipment PV161
2 62201
16.2 Use of sonar equipment PV162
16.3 Reporting protocols PV163
17 L/G Provide Temporary Marking of Buried Pipeline Prior to Excavation X
17.1 Locate line (Also in Corrosion 61103) PV171
1 62107
17.2 Install marker PV172
17.3 Inspect and maintain marker PV173
18 L/G Inspection Following Excavation Activities and Leak Survey After Blasting X
18.1 Utilize leak survey techniques 2 62206 PV181
18.2 Monitor for pressure loss PV182
20 L/G Inspect Valves (Also in Mechanical 63204) X
20.1 Routine walk-around inspection PV201
20.2 External integrity inspection 2 62203 PV202
20.3 Function test valve PV203
20.4 Leak test valve PV204
27 L Inspection of Breakout Tanks X
27.1 Routine monthly inspection of breakout tanks 2 62202 PV271
27.2 Inspection of in-service breakout tanks PV272
28 L/G Provide Security for Pipeline Facilities X PV280
1 62106
No Subtasks
29 L/G Launching/Receiving Inline Inspection Device X
29.1 Launching in-line inspection devices 3 62303 PV291
29.2 Receiving in-line inspection devices PV292
32 32.0 Monitoring Excavation Activities 1 62107 PV320
2
Written Assessments

Tech 1-Measurement
Abmormal Operating
Abmormal Operating
Contren
Mechanical Pipeline
Abnormal Operating
Tech 1-Installation
Field Technician 2
Field Technician 3
Gas Maintenance
Conditions-(Gas)
Performance
Verifications
Learning Series
Technician
Technician
Technician
Task #
Level
Type
33 L/G Moving In-Service Pipe X

33.1 Determine allowable line pressure in section to be moved PV331
3 62305
33.2 Preparation for movement activities PV332
33.3 Moving in-service pipeline PV333
34 L/G Inspect Existing Pipe Following Movement X PV340
3 62302/305
No Subtasks
Measure Clearance From Existing Pipe to Underground Structures Installed by Excavation, Boring,
35 L/G X PV350
Directional Drilling 3 62302
No Subtasks
36 L/G Abandoning, Safe Disconnect, Purging and Sealing of Pipeline Facilities X
36.1 Safe disconnect of pipeline facilities PV361
3 62309
36.2 Purging of pipeline facilities PV362
36.3 Sealing a disconnected portion of pipeline PV363
37 L/G Install or Repair Support Structures on Existing Above Ground Components X PV370
3 62304
No Subtasks
Inspection Activities for Tie-Ins, Pipe Replacements, or Other Components Connecting to an
38 L/G
Existing Pipeline
38.1 Visually inspect pipe and pipe components 2 62205 X PV381
38.2 Verify non-destructive weld test (NDT) X PV382
38.3 Visually inspect that welds meet DOT requirements (API 1104) X PV383
38.4 Radiographic Testing of Pipeline Weld 4 62401 X TBD
39 L/G Backfilling a Trench Following Maintenance X PV390
1 62107
No Subtasks
40 L/G Perform General Pipeline Repair Activities 3 Split X
40.1 Tight fitting sleeve 3 62304 PV401
40.2 Oversleeve 3 62304 PV402
40.3 Clock spring 3 62304 PV403
40.4 Plidco split repair sleeve (Identify and use generic term for this area) 3 62304 PV404
40.5 Weld plus coupling (Identify and use generic term for this area) 3 62304 PV405
40.6 Stopple fitting preparation/sandwich valve installation 3 62306 PV406
40.7 Tapping a pipeline 2” and under 3 62304 PV407
40.8 Tapping a pipeline 2 ½” and larger 3 62306 PV408
40.9 Sealing the pipeline with a stopple plugging machine 3 62306 PV409
40.91 Plugging the pipeline with the lock-o-ring completion plug 3 62304/306 PV409-1
41 L/G Conduct Pressure Test X X PV410
2 62207
No Subtasks
42 L/G Maintenance Welding on Pipelines X
42.1 Repair of arc burns PV421
42.2 Repair of defective welds, other than welds containing cracks PV422
42.3 Repair of a direct pass on a weld containing a defect other than a crack 3 62308 PV423
42.4 Repair of butt welds containing cracks PV424
42.5 Repair of a previously repaired area PV425
42.6 Replacement of a weld or cylinder of pipe PV426
52 G Leakage Survey X
52.1 Conduct vegetation survey PV521
2 62206
52.2 Conduct a leak survey with a CGD PV522
52.3 Conduct a leak survey with a flame ionization unit PV523
59 G Vault Maintenance X PV590
3 62310
No Subtasks
3
Written Assessments

Tech 1-Measurement
Abmormal Operating
Abmormal Operating
Contren
Mechanical Pipeline
Abnormal Operating
Tech 1-Installation
Field Technician 2
Field Technician 3
Gas Maintenance
Conditions-(Gas)
Performance
Verifications
Learning Series
Technician
Technician
Technician
Task #
Level
Type
MECHANICAL
19 L/G Valve Maintenance Split
19.1 Valve body winterization or corrosion inhibition 1 63107 X PV191
19.2 Valve lubrication 1 63107 X PV192
19.3 Valve seat sealing 1 63107 X PV193
19.4 Valve stem packing maintenance 1 63107 X PV194
19.5 Actuator/operator adjustment, electric (Also in E&I 64208) 3 63308 X PV195
19.6 Actuator/operator adjustment, pneumatic 3 63306 X PV196
19.7 Actuator/operator adjustment, hydraulic 3 63307 X PV197
20 L/G Inspect Valves (Also in Maintenance 62203) X
20.1 Routine walk-around inspection PV201
20.2 External integrity inspection 2 63204 PV202
20.3 Function test valve PV203
20.4 Leak test valve PV204
21 L/G Repair Valves Split
21.1 Repair valve actuator/operator, pneumatic 3 63306 X PV211
21.2 Disassembly/re-assembly of valve 2 63204 X PV212
21.3 Internal inspection of valve 2 63204 X PV213
21.4 Repair valve actuator/operator, hydraulic 3 63307 X PV214
21.5 Repair valve actuator/operator, electric 3 63308 X PV215
Inspect Tank Pressure/Vacuum Breakers and Inspect, Test and Calibrate HVLTank Pressure Relief
22 L X PV220
Valves 2 63205
No Subtasks
23 L/G Maintain and Repair Relief Valves and Pressure Limiting Devices X
23.1 Maintain/repair relief valves 2 63205 PV231
23.2 Maintain/repair pressure limiting devices PV232
24 L/G Inspect, Test and Calibrate Pressure Limiting Devices and Relief Valves X PV240
2 63205
No Subtasks
ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION
19 L/G 19.5 Actuator/operator adjustment, electric (Also in Mechanical 63308) 2 64208 X PV195
25 L/G Inspect, Test and Calibrate Pressures Switches and Transmitters X
25.1 Inspect, test and calibrate pressure switches 2 64206 PV251
25.2 Inspect, test and calibrate pressure transmitters PV252
Verify or Set Protection Parameters for Programmable Controllers and/or Other Instrumentation
26 L/G X PV260
Control Loops 2 64207
No Subtasks
30 L Test Overfill Protective Devices X PV300
2 64206
No Subtasks
31 L Inspect and Calibrate Overfill Protective Devices X PV310
2 64206
No Subtasks
44 L CPM Leak Detection X
44.1 Inspection, testing and calibrations of leak detection equipment 2 64209 PV441
44.2 Verify the leak detection system meets design parameters PV442
55 G Maintain Fixed Gas Detection Equipment X PV550
2 64210
No Subtasks
4
Written Assessments

Tech 1-Measurement
Abmormal Operating
Abmormal Operating
Contren
Mechanical Pipeline
Abnormal Operating
Tech 1-Installation
Field Technician 2
Field Technician 3
Gas Maintenance
Conditions-(Gas)
Performance
Verifications
Learning Series
Technician
Technician
Technician
Task #
Level
Type
LIQUID PIPELINE FIELD OPERATIONS

43 L/G Operations of a Pipeline System Split
43.1 Start-up of a pipeline 1 60105 X PV431
43.2 Shutdown of a pipeline 1 60105 X PV432
43.3 Monitor pressures, flows, communications and line integrity and maintain them within allowable limits 1 60106 X PV433
43.4 Manually or remotely open or close valves or other equipment 1 60105 X PV434
LIQUID PIPELINE CONTROL CENTER OPERATIONS
43 L/G Operations of a Pipeline System Split
43.1 Start-up of a pipeline 1 65106 X PV431
43.2 Shutdown of a pipeline 1 65106 X PV432
43.3 Monitor pressures, flows, communications and line integrity and maintain them within allowable limits 1 65105 X PV433
43.4 Manually or remotely open or close valves or other equipment 1 65106 X PV434
GAS PIPELINE OPERATIONS
43 L/G Operations of a Pipeline System Split X
43.1 Start-up of a pipeline PV431
43.2 Shutdown of a pipeline PV432
1 67104/105
43.3 Monitor pressures, flows, communications and line integrity and maintain them within allowable limits PV433
43.4 Manually or remotely open or close valves or other equipment PV434

50 G Purge Gas from a Pipeline X PV500
1 67104/105
No Subtasks
51 G Purge Air from a Pipeline X PV510
1 67104/105
No Subtasks
54 G Test Remote Control Shutdown Devices 1 67104/105 X PV540
56 G Perform Incremental Pressure Increases to Uprate MAOP X PV560
1 67104/105
No Subtasks
57 G Operate Odorant Equipment X PV570
1 67104/105
No Subtasks
58 G Monitor Odorant Level X PV580
1 67104/105
No Subtasks
5
Regulations Update
Federal Liquids – Part 195
IM Requirements
HCAs
Federal Gas – Part 192
IM Requirements
HCAs
1
Integrity Management Websites
US DOT Implementing Integrity Management
General (http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/iim/)
Liquids ((http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/iim/index.htm)
Gas (http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/gasimp/)
National Association Corrosion Engineers
(www.nace.org)
American Petroleum Institute (www.api.org)
American Society Mechanical Engineers
(www.asme.org)
Interstate Natural Gas Association of America
(www.ingaa.org)
2
Pipeline Integrity Management
Hazardous Liquids
Part 195
3
4
Is integrity management simply
inspection of pipe condition?
NO! While assessing the pipe condition and
correcting identified anomalies is an important part
of the rule, there are other important requirements.
Operators must:
1) Develop improved management and analysis
processes that integrate all available integrity-
related data and information, and assess the risks
associated with segments that can affect HCAs.
2) Implement additional risk control measures if

needed to protect HCAs.
5
195.452 (f) An operator must include, at minimum,
each of the following elements in its written integrity
management program:
• Process to identify segments that could affect a

high consequence area
• Baseline assessment plan
• Process to that integrates / analyzes all
available information about the integrity of the
entire pipeline and the consequences of a
failure
• Criteria for remedial actions identified by
assessment methods and information analysis
6
195.452 (f) An operator must include, at minimum,
each of the following elements in its written integrity
management program (continued):
• Must be a continual process of assessment

and evaluation
• Must have a process to identify need for
additional preventive and mitigative
measures to protect HCA
• Must have metrics / methods to measure
program's effectiveness
• Process for review of integrity assessment
results and information analysis
7
Integrity Management Program Flow Chart
Identify Pipeline Segments Initial Data Gathering, Review, and
that Could Affect HCAs Integration
Initial Risk
Assessment
Develop Baseline
Assessment Plan
Implement Baseline Assessments
Evaluate
Program
Revise Inspection, Update, Integrate, and
Mitigation, and Monitoring Review Data
Plans
Reassess Risk/HCA
Manage Change
8
Examples of additional measures:
Leak detection system enhancements

Use of Emergency Flow Restricting Devices
Emergency response improvements
Corrosion control program improvements
Enhanced damage prevention programs
Reduced inspection intervals
9
Pipeline Integrity Management in High
Consequence Areas – DOT 195.452
(a) Pipelines covered by this section? Each hazardous liquid
pipeline and carbon dioxide pipeline that could affect a high
consequence area, including any pipeline located in a high
consequence area unless the operator effectively demonstrates
by risk assessment that the pipeline could not affect the area.
Covered pipelines are categorized as follows:
Category 1
pipelines existing on May 29, 2001 and
owned or operated by an operator with more than 500 miles of
pipeline subject to this part.
Category 2
pipelines existing on May 29, 2001 and
owned or operated by an operator with less than 500 miles of
pipeline
Category 3
includes pipelines constructed or converted after May 29, 2001.10
Pipeline Integrity Management in High
Consequence Areas (HCA) – DOT 195.450
High consequence area means:
(1) A commercially navigable waterway (CNW), which means a
waterway where a substantial likelihood of commercial
navigation exists;
(2) A high population area (HPA), which means an urbanized area,
as defined and delineated by the Census Bureau, that contains
50,000 or more people and has a population density of at least
1,000 people per square mile;
(3) An other populated area (OPA), which means a place, as
defined and delineated by the Census Bureau, that contains a
concentrated population, such as an incorporated or
unincorporated city, town, village, or other designated
residential or commercial area;
(4) An unusually sensitive area (USA), as defined in §195.6.
11
Unusually Sensitive Areas
Part 195.6 very complex

Ecological Habitats
Endangered Species
Water Sources / Aquifers
Requires government
databases / GIS map
layers
Terrain / dispersion
modeling
12
195 Appendix C: Resource Material for Identification of
HCAs
The rule defines a High Consequence Area as a high population area, an other
populated area, an unusually sensitive area, or a commercially navigable waterway.
The Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) will map these areas on the National Pipeline
Mapping System (NPMS). An operator, member of the public or other government
agency may view and download the data from the NPMS home page http://
www.npms.phmsa.gov/. OPS will maintain the NPMS and update it periodically.
However, it is an operator's responsibility to ensure that it has identified all high
consequence areas that could be affected by a pipeline segment. An operator is also
responsible for periodically evaluating its pipeline segments to look for population
or environmental changes that may have occurred around the pipeline and to keep
its program current with this information. (Refer to § 195.452(d)(3).)
(1) Digital Data on populated areas available on U.S. Census Bureau maps.
(2) Geographic Database on the commercial navigable waterways available on
http://www.bts.gov/gis/ntatlas/networks.html.
(3) The Bureau of Transportation Statistics database that includes commercially
navigable waterways and non-commercially navigable waterways. The database
can be downloaded from the BTS website at
http://www.bts.gov/gis/ntatlas/networks.html.
13
DOT 195.452
(b) What program and practices must operators use to manage
pipeline integrity?
Each operator of a pipeline covered by this section must:
1. Develop a written integrity management program that
addresses the risks on each segment of pipeline in the first
column of the following table not later than the date in the
second column:
Category 1 March 31, 2002
Category 2 February 18, 2003
Category 3 1 year after start of

pipeline operation
14
DOT 195.452
(b) What program and practices must operators use to manage
pipeline integrity?
Each operator of a pipeline covered by this section must:
2. Identify each pipeline or pipeline segment accordingly:
Category 1 December 31, 2001

Category 2 November 18, 2002
Category 3 Date the pipeline

begins operation
15
DOT 195.452
(b) Completion schedule requirements for baseline
assessments
100% complete At least 50% complete,
starting w. highest risk
Category 1 March 31, 2008 September 30, 2004
Category 2 February 17, 2009 August 16, 2005
Category 3 Date pipeline Not applicable

begins service
16
DOT 195.452
Baseline assessment methods
A. Internal inspection tool or tools capable of
detecting corrosion and deformation anomalies
including dents, gouges and grooves;
B. Pressure test conducted in accordance with subpart
E of this part;
C. External corrosion direct assessment in accordance
with §195.588; or
D. Other technology that the operator demonstrates
can provide an equivalent understanding of the
condition of the line pipe. Must notify OPS 90 days
before conducting assessment.
17
Direct Assessment (DA)
Specific to the integrity threat of external
corrosion only (§195.588)
DA and standards added to liquid rule
§195.588 What standards apply to direct
assessment?
NACE Standard RP0502-2002 “Pipeline
External Corrosion Direct Assessment
Methodology'' (2002)
18
DOT 195.452
Baseline assessment plan requirements:

i. The methods selected to assess the
integrity of the line pipe;
ii. A schedule for completing the integrity
assessment;
iii. An explanation of the assessment
methods selected and evaluation of risk
factors considered in establishing the
assessment schedule.
19
195.452 (h) actions an Operator must take to
address integrity issues:
Address all anomalous conditions the operator

discovers through the integrity assessment or
information analysis
Evaluate all anomalous conditions and remediate
those that could reduce a pipeline's integrity
Be able to demonstrate that the remediation of the
condition will ensure the condition is unlikely to pose a
threat to the long-term integrity of the pipeline.
Comply with § 195.422 when making a repair
Repairs are made in a safe manner and so as to prevent
damage to persons or property
Designed and constructed as required by part 195
20
§ 195.452 What actions must an
operator take to address integrity issues?
TEMPORARY PRESSURE REDUCTION:

An operator must notify PHMSA, in
accordance with paragraph (m) of this
section, if the operator cannot meet the
schedule for evaluation and remediation
required under paragraph (h)(3) of this
section AND cannot provide safety
through a temporary reduction in
operating pressure.
21
LONG-TERM PRESSURE REDUCTION:

When a pressure reduction exceeds 365
days, the operator must notify PHMSA in
accordance with paragraph (m) of this
section and explain the reasons for the
delay. An operator must also take further
remedial action to ensure the safety of
the pipeline.
22
Key Terms
Anomalous condition
Discovery of a condition (discovered
condition)
Remediation related conditions
Immediate repair
60 day
180 day
23
195.452 (h) Examples of conditions that
should be scheduled for evaluation and
remediation; Appendix C Section VII
Any change since the previous assessment

Mechanical damage that is located on the top side
of the pipe
An anomaly abrupt in nature
An anomaly longitudinal in orientation
An anomaly over a large area
An anomaly located
• in or near a casing
• a crossing of another pipeline
• or an area with suspect cathodic protection
24
Discovery of a condition?
Discovery of a condition occurs when an operator has
adequate information about the condition to
determine that the condition presents a potential
threat to the integrity of the pipeline. An operator
must promptly, but no later than 180 days after an
integrity assessment, obtain sufficient information
about a condition to make that determination, unless
the operator can demonstrate that the 180-day
period is impracticable.
25
(h) What actions must an operator take
to address integrity issues? (3)
Schedule for evaluation and remediation.
Complete remediation of a condition
according to a schedule prioritizing the
conditions for evaluation and remediation.
If an operator cannot meet the schedule
for any condition, the operator must
explain the reasons why it cannot meet
the schedule and how the changed
schedule will not jeopardize public safety
or environmental protection.
26
195.452 Special requirements for scheduling
remediation? (h)(4)
(i) Immediate repair conditions. An operator's evaluation

and remediation schedule must provide for immediate
repair conditions. To maintain safety, an operator must
temporarily reduce operating pressure or shut down the
pipeline until the operator completes the repair of these
conditions. An operator must calculate the temporary
reduction in operating pressure using the formula in
Section 451.6.2.2 (b) of ANSI/ ASME B31.4 (incorporated
by reference, see § 195.3).
27
remediation? (i)
Immediate Repair Conditions
(A) Metal Loss > 80% Regardless of dimension

(B) Predicted burst Calculated by ASME/ANSI
pressure < MOP B31G or AGA PR-3-805
RSTRNG
(C) Dent 4 to 8 o’clock With indication of metal loss,
(top) cracking or other stress riser
(D) Dent 4 to 8 o’clock > 6% nominal pipe diameter
(top)
(E) An anomaly that in the judgment of the person designated by the
operator to evaluate the assessment results requires immediate
action
28
remediation? (ii)
60-day Repair Conditions
(A) Dent 4 to 8 o’clock > 3% nominal pipe diameter

(top)
(B) Dent Bottom Has any indication of metal
loss, cracking or a stress riser
29
remediation? (iii)
180-day Repair Conditions
(A) Dent > 2% nominal pipe Affects pipe curvature at a

diameter girth weld or a longitudinal
seam weld
(B) Dent > 2% nominal pipe 4 to 8 o’clock (top)
diameter
(C) Dent > 6% nominal pipe Bottom
diameter
(D) Remaining strength calculation of operating pressure that is < the
current established MOP at the location of the anomaly
(E) An area of > 50% wall loss
general
corrosion
30
remediation? (iii)
180-day Repair Conditions (continued)
(F) Metal loss > 50% Located at a crossing of

another pipeline, or is in
an area with widespread
circumferential corrosion,
or is in an area that
could affect a girth weld
(G) A potential crack indication that when excavated is determined to
be a crack
(H) Corrosion of or along a longitudinal seam weld
(I) A gouge or groove > 12.5% of nominal wall
31
remediation? (iv)
Other conditions:
In addition to the conditions listed in paragraphs
(h)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section, an operator
must evaluate any condition identified by an integrity
assessment or information analysis that could impair
the integrity of the pipeline, and as appropriate,
schedule the condition for remediation.
32
DOT 195.452
Assessment intervals:
An operator must establish five-year intervals,
not to exceed 68 months, for continually
assessing the line pipe's integrity. An operator
must base the assessment intervals on the risk
the line pipe poses to the high consequence
area to determine the priority for assessing the
pipeline segments. An operator must establish
the assessment intervals based on the factors
specified in paragraph (e) of this section, the
analysis of the results from the last integrity
assessment, and the information analysis
required by paragraph (g) of this section.
33
Part 195 Summary of Notifications
34
35
§195.120 Passage of Internal
Inspection Device
Each new pipeline and each line
section of a pipeline where the line
pipe, valve, fitting or other line
component is replaced, must be
designed and constructed to
accommodate the passage of
instrumented internal inspection
devices
36
§195.120 Passage of Internal
Inspection Device
Exceptions
1. Manifolds;
2. Station piping such as at pump stations, meter stations,
or pressure reducing stations;
3. Piping associated with tank farms and other storage
facilities;
4. Cross-overs;
5. Sizes of pipe for which an instrumented internal
inspection device is not commercially available;
6. Offshore pipelines, other than main lines 10 inches (254
millimeters) or greater in nominal diameter, that
transport liquids to onshore facilities; and,
7. Other piping that the Administrator under §190.9 of this
chapter, finds in a particular case would be
impracticable to design and construct to accommodate
the passage of instrumented internal inspection devices.
37
§195.49 Performance Reporting
Reporting of Integrity Management related
performance parameters are included in the
Annual Reporting Requirements for Liquid
Pipelines (Part J of Annual Report)
Federal Register: April 23, 2007 (Volume 72,
Number 77): Senior Executive Signature and
Certification of Integrity Management Program
Performance Reports
Includes a provision requiring the senior executive
officers of pipeline operating companies to certify
annual and semiannual pipeline integrity management
program performance reports. This advisory provides
information to assist pipeline operators with certifying
future submissions.
38
Final Rule for Hazardous Liquid
Operator Annual Reports
Part J – Integrity Inspections Conducted and

Actions Taken Based on Inspections
Mileage inspected with ILI tools by tool type
Actions taken based on ILI inspections
Pressure Testing (mileage, test results information)
Other Inspection Techniques, Including Direct
Assessment
Total mileage inspected (all methods) and actions taken
39
40
195.452(i)(1)-(4) What preventative and mitigative measures must
an operator take to protect the high consequence area?
(1) General requirements. An operator must take measures to

prevent and mitigate the consequences of a pipeline failure that
could affect a high consequence area. These measures include
conducting a risk analysis of the pipeline segment to identify
additional actions to enhance public safety or environmental
protection. Such actions may include, but are not limited to,
implementing damage prevention best practices, better
monitoring of cathodic protection where corrosion is a concern,
establishing shorter inspection intervals, installing EFRDs on the
pipeline segment, modifying the systems that monitor pressure
and detect leaks, providing additional training to personnel on
response procedures, conducting drills with local emergency
responders and adopting other management controls.
41
(2) Risk analysis criteria. In identifying the need for additional preventive and
mitigative measures, an operator must evaluate the likelihood of a pipeline
release occurring and how a release could affect the high consequence area.
This determination must consider all relevant risk factors, including, but not
limited to:
(i) Terrain surrounding the pipeline segment, including drainage systems such
as small streams and other smaller waterways that could act as a conduit to
the high consequence area;
(ii) Elevation profile;
(iii) Characteristics of the product transported;
(iv) Amount of product that could be released;
(v) Possibility of a spillage in a farm field following the drain tile into a
waterway;
(vi) Ditches along side a roadway the pipeline crosses;
(vii) Physical support of the pipeline segment such as by a cable suspension
bridge;
(viii) Exposure of the pipeline to operating pressure exceeding established
maximum operating pressure.
42
(3) Leak detection. An operator must have a means to

detect leaks on its pipeline system. An operator must
evaluate the capability of its leak detection means
and modify, as necessary, to protect the high
consequence area. An operator's evaluation must, at
least, consider, the following factors–length and size
of the pipeline, type of product carried, the pipeline's
proximity to the high consequence area, the
swiftness of leak detection, location of nearest
response personnel, leak history, and risk assessment
results.
43
(4) Emergency Flow Restricting Devices (EFRD). If an operator

determines that an EFRD is needed on a pipeline segment to
protect a high consequence area in the event of a hazardous
liquid pipeline release, an operator must install the EFRD. In
making this determination, an operator must, at least, consider
the following factors–the swiftness of leak detection and
pipeline shutdown capabilities, the type of commodity carried,
the rate of potential leakage, the volume that can be released,
topography or pipeline profile, the potential for ignition,
proximity to power sources, location of nearest response
personnel, specific terrain between the pipeline segment and
the high consequence area, and benefits expected by reducing
the spill size.
44
Frequently Asked Questions
Do the requirements of the rule apply to

“idle” pipe?
Does the rule apply to more than line
pipe?
Does the rule apply to offshore
pipelines?
Does the rule apply to gathering?
45
Do the requirements of the rule apply
to "idle" pipe?
The regulations do not define "idle" pipe. Pipe is considered
either active or abandoned. PHMSA Pipeline Safety understands
"idle" pipe, as used in the context of this question, as pipe not
currently being used to move hazardous liquid but that could be
put back in service at a future date. This may include in-service
pipe (i.e., contains hazardous liquids but is currently static or
unused) or out-of-service pipe (i.e., effectively isolated from
active pipe and containing water or inert gas). All idle pipe is
subject to the requirements of the integrity management rule.
However, idle pipe presents different risks and different
treatment is appropriate.
Operators must meet all requirements and deadlines for pipe that
is idled and contains hazardous liquids.
Out-of-service idle pipe represents a negligible hazard and PHMSA
Pipeline Safety will accept deferral of certain activities required by
the rule for out-of-service idle pipe.
46
Does the rule apply to more
than line pipe?
Yes. The continual evaluation and information

analysis requirements of the rule apply to
pipelines as defined in 49 CFR 195.2. This
includes, but is not limited to, line pipe, valves
and other appurtenances connected to line pipe,
metering and delivery stations, pump stations,
and breakout tanks. The baseline integrity
assessment and periodic re-assessment
requirements apply only to line pipe.
47
Does the rule apply to offshore
pipelines?
Yes, but the rule does not apply to

all offshore pipelines. The rule
applies to those segments of
offshore pipelines that could affect
HCAs, principally commercially
navigable waterways and unusually
sensitive areas.
48
Does the rule apply to gathering and
other low-stress lines?
Yes. The rule applies to all pipeline

(affecting HCAs) covered under
Part 195. Rural gathering lines are
not covered by Part 195, and thus
do not fall under the rule. Non rural
gathering lines affecting HCAs are
covered by the rule.
49
49 CFR Part 192

Pipeline Safety: Pipeline Integrity
Management in High Consequence
Areas (Gas Transmission)
1
Integrity Management Websites
US DOT Implementing Integrity
Management
Gas (http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/gasimp/)
National Association Corrosion Engineers
(www.nace.org)
Gas Technology Institute (www.gti.org)
American Society Mechanical Engineers
(www.asme.org)
Interstate Natural Gas Association of
America (www.ingaa.org)
2
3
Final Rule
Created new Subpart O. Pipeline
Applies to gas transmission line segments
located in a High Consequence Area (HCA)
Does not apply to gas gathering or
distribution
Published December 15, 2003
Effective February 14, 2004
4
IM Rule Requires Operator to:
Develop integrity management plans
Perform ongoing integrity assessments;
Improve data collection, integration, and
analysis;
Repair and remediate pipeline as
necessary; and
Implement preventative and mitigative
programs.
5
IM Gas Transmission Lines
- Key Dates
December 17, 2004 – Identification of HCA

December 2007 – Baseline Assessments
complete on 50% of HCA mileage
December 2012 - Baseline Assessments
complete on 100% of HCA mileage
6
Rule Incorporates ASME
B31.8S
Specifically ASME/ANSI B31.8 2001,

Managing System Integrity of Gas
Pipelines
Includes concepts pertaining to material
and construction defects and decreasing
operating pressure
7
Determination of HCA
Final rule allows two methods for

determination of HCAs
HCA for a gas line is a pipe segment
that is close to…
Population
Public places and buildings
Locations which are difficult to evacuate
8
Method 1 Method 2
9
Potential Impact Radius
Means the radius of a circle within

which the potential failure of a pipeline
could have significant impact on people
or property
10
Method (1) Uses Class Location and
Potential Impact Circles
192.903 (1) (i – iv)
i. A Class 3 location under 192.5 or;
ii. A Class 4 location under 192.5 or;
iii. Any area in a Class 1 or Class 2 location where
the potential impact radius is greater than 660
feet (200 meters), and the area within a
potential impact circle contains 20 or more
buildings intended for human occupancy; or
iv. Any area in a Class 1 or Class 2 location where
the potential impact radius circle contains an
identified site.
11
Method 1 – Illustration
DWELLINGS MAOP, DIAMETER, PRODUCT
POTENTIAL IMPACT RADIUS

Class 1 or 2 with
Any PIC w/Ident.site
PIR >660ft
CLASS LOCATION
POTENTIAL IMPACT CIRCLES
CLASS
3 or 4
DWELLINGS IDENTIFIED SITES
≥20 ≥1
HIGH CONSEQUENCE AREAS
12
Method (2) Only Uses
Potential Impact Circles
192.903 (2) (i – ii)
The area within a potential impact circle

containing--
i. 20 or more buildings intended for human
occupancy, unless the exception in paragraph
(4) applies; or
ii. An identified site
13
Method 2 – Illustration
MAOP, DIAMETER, PRODUCT
POTENTIAL IMPACT RADIUS

No Minimum
POTENTIAL IMPACT CIRCLES
DWELLINGS IDENTIFIED SITES

≥20 ≥1
HIGH CONSEQUENCE AREAS
14
Method 2
Method 2 will:
Tend to exclude a lot of low pressure
piping segments
Small Potential Impact Circles
Some Class 3 and 4 Locations will not be
HCA segments
15
Determination of Potential
Impact Radius (PIR)
2
r 0.69 p d
r Potential Impact Radius (ft)
0.69 Factor for Natural Gas
p Pipeline MAOP (psi)
d Nominal Diameter (inches)
(Refer to Section 3.2 AMSE/ANSI B31.8S for different gas constant factors) 16
Axial Extension of HCA - Applies
to both Methods 1 & 2
192.903 (3)
i. The length of the HCA extends axially

along the length of the pipeline from the
outmost edge of the first potential impact
circle that contains an identified site or
20 or more buildings intended for human
occupancy to the outmost edge of the
last contiguous impact circle that
contains either an identified site or 20 or
more buildings for human occupancy
17
Illustration of Axial Extension
Identified Site
Potential Impact
Circle
Axial Extension Axial Extension
18
Result of Definition on HCA
Length
Length of pipe within HCA plus one

radius length along the pipe in each
direction
Provides compensation for potential
axial jetting at line failure location
19
POTENTIAL
IMPACT CIRCLES
20
PIC Definition
Identified Site
Potential Impact
Circle
HCA
Segment
21
Mid-pipe Change in PIR
School
PIR PIR
ABC Pipeline
36” Diameter 24” Diameter

PIR = 860ft PIR = 570ft
HCA
Segment MAOP = 1200 psig 22
Dwellings
20 or more dwellings in PIR of 660ft or
more
Count
Potential
= 32 Impact Circle
23
Dwellings
more
24
Dwellings
more
25
Identified Site Locations
Three General Categories
Occupied Buildings
Public Place Outdoors
Confined or Impaired Mobility
26
Identified Sites
Occupied Buildings
Building occupied by people
≥20 people, ≥5 days a week, ≥10 weeks in any
12 months
Public Place Outdoors (outside area or open
structure)
Outside places where people congregate
≥20 people, ≥50 days, any 12 month period
Facility where people are confined, impaired
mobility, or difficult to evacuate
27
Occupied Buildings
Final rule includes buildings housing 20

or more persons for 5 days per week
and 10 weeks per year (the days and
weeks need not be consecutive)
Office buildings, religious facilities,
community centers, stores, etc.
28
Public Place Outdoors 192.903
Outside areas or open structure that is occupied by 20
or more persons on at least 50 days in any 12 month
period, examples include but are not limited to:
Beaches Recreational areas
Playgrounds near a body of
Recreational facilities water
Camping grounds Areas outside a rural
building such as a
Outdoor theaters religious facility
Stadiums Etc.
29
Examples include but are not limited to:
Hospitals
Prisons
Schools
Day-care facilities
Retirement facilities
Assisted-living facilities
Etc. 30
Identification of Identified Sites
Requirements explained in detail in 192.905

In general, Operator must identify from:
information the operator has obtained from
routine operation and maintenance activities and
from public officials with safety or emergency
response or planning responsibilities who indicate
to the operator that they know of locations that
meet the identified site criteria
31
Identification of Identified Sites (cont.)
What must the Operator do if the public

officials inform the Operator that they do not
have the information?
The Operator must use one of the following
sources;
i. Visible marking (e.g., a sign); or
ii. The site is licensed or registered by a Federal,
State, or local government agency; or
iii. The site is on a list (including a list on an internet
web site) or map maintained by or available from
a Federal, State, or local government agency and
available to the general public
32
Data Sources for Identified
Sites
Posted signs (field survey)
Registered lists (acquired data)
Known to local safety officials
Listed by government (state, local,
etc.)
33
What about newly identified sites
(previously unknown)?
Operator must incorporate new

HCA segments within baseline
assessment plan within 1 year of
the date of identification
34
Operator Facilities?
No exemption for Operator facilities
that meet the criteria.
Pipeline Operators facilities should
be treated in the same way as other
facilities (e.g. 20 or more persons,
50 days /yr if outdoors, 5 days per
week 10 wks / yr if indoors)
Occupied Buildings
35
Structure Counts – Dwellings
Type = Dwelling
Units = 1
Type = Dwelling
Units = 5
36
Identified Sites
What about trails or pathways?
Type = Offices
Staff = 32
What about parking lots?
Type = Public
Name = Parking_Lot
Freq = 34/5
37
Identified Sites
Type = Mobility
Name = Public_School
Desc = JFK H.School
38
Important Next Steps in IM Process
After identifying HCAs and Before
planning Integrity Assessments
Identify Integrity Threats
Assemble & Integrate Integrity Related Data
Determine Risk Assessment Method
Perform Risk Assessment
Identify Any Actions to Address Certain
Threats
Select Integrity Assessment Methods
39
Pipeline Integrity Threats
1) External Corrosion
2) Internal Corrosion
3) Stress Corrosion Cracking
4) Manufacturing Related Defects
5) Welding/Fabrication Related
6) Equipment
7) Third Party/ Mechanical Damage
8) Incorrect Operations
9) Weather Related and Outside Force
40
41
42
Assessment Methods
In-Line Inspection (ILI)

Subpart J Pressure Test
Direct Assessment
Threat specific
Other Technology
Must submit 180 day notification
43
In-Line Inspection Tools
• Geometry for detecting changes to ovality, e.g.,
bends, dents, buckles or wrinkles, due to
construction flaws or soil movement, or other
outside force damage;
• Metal Loss (Ultrasonic and Magnetic Flux Leakage)
for determining pipe wall anomalies, e.g., wall loss
due to corrosion.
• Crack Detection Tools for detecting cracks and
crack-like features, e.g., stress corrosion cracking
(SCC), fatigue cracks, narrow axial corrosion, toe
cracks, hook cracks, etc.
44
Assessment Timing
by December 17, 2007
50% of covered segments starting
with highest risk
by December 17, 2012
All covered segments
45
What about new pipelines?
New pipeline installed in HCA is subject
to rule
Installation pressure test conducted in
accordance with Subpart J would satisfy
baseline assessment
Intervals for reassessment would be
from the date of baseline assessment
for any covered segment
46
Assessments Conducted Prior
to the IM Rule
Rule allows previously conducted

assessments
Must substantially meet the
requirements for assessments in rule
If using prior assessment as
baseline assessment
Reassessment must be completed by
December 17, 2009
47
Direct Assessment - Definition
An integrity assessment method that utilizes a

process to evaluate certain threats (i.e.,
external corrosion, internal corrosion and stress
corrosion cracking) to a covered pipeline
segment's integrity. The process includes the
gathering and integration of risk factor data,
indirect examination or analysis to identify
areas of suspected corrosion, direct
examination of the pipeline in these areas, and
post assessment evaluation.
48
Application of Direct
Assessment
Must meet requirements and follow
referenced standards in §192.490
Applicable to onshore transmission lines
Pipelines constructed of steel or iron
Methods vary depending upon specific
threat
49
Types of Direct Assessment
Integrity Threat Specific

External Corrosion Direct Assessment (ECDA)
Internal Corrosion Direct Assessment (ICDA)
Stress Corrosion Cracking Direct Assessment
(SCCDA)
50
Direct Assessment §192.490
(with referenced standards)
Threat Standard – plan must comply with
requirements in:
External Corrosion (ECDA) §192.925 - ASME/ANSI B31.8S

(see §192.7), section 6.4; NACE
SP0502-2008 (see §192.7); and
§192.925
Internal corrosion in pipelines that §192.927 - ASME/ANSI B31.8S,

transport dry gas (ICDA) section 6.4 and appendix B2, and
§192.927
Stress corrosion cracking (SCCDA) §192.929 - ASME/ANSI B31.8S,

appendix A3, and §192.929
51
Direct Assessment – General Process
1. Pre-assessment
2. Indirect examination
3. Direct examination
4. Post assessment
52
Pre-Assessment
Determines feasibility of direct

assessment
If direct assessment is not feasible use
other technology such as in-line inspection
or hydrotesting
Establish applicability of DA
Determine DA regions (provides basis
for selecting tools)
53
Direct Assessment Regions
Determination of the characteristics

along the line that affect the ability to
apply one or another assessment
technique (examples: paved, unpaved,
cased road crossing, river crossing,
etc.)
54
Indirect Examination
Utilizes above-ground techniques

Data modeling tools
Historical construction, operating,
and maintenance data are also
used to determine likelihood or
potential locations for failure
55
Direct Examination
Inspection of the pipeline condition, soil

conditions, coating condition, assess
corrosion and any other abnormal
conditions, can perform non-destructive
examinations to measure the extent of
external, internal corrosion, or stress
corrosion cracking
56
Post Assessment
Integration and analysis of data

Additional data collection
Identify required integrity measures
Can be anything from mitigation to
immediate repairs
Define re-inspection intervals
57
Direct Assessment
Example of Indirect Examination
Methods
58
Indirect Examination Techniques
External Corrosion DA
Close interval survey (CIS)
DC voltage gradient (DCVG)
AC voltage gradient (ACVG)
Electromagnetic
……………discuss example………
59
Indirect Examination Technique
Internal Corrosion DA
Water hold-up flow modeling in gas
transmission lines
60
ICDA Flow Modeling Principles
Liquids flow along bottom of pipe and
accumulate at certain points
Water trap or accumulation points are higher
likelihood for internal corrosion
Identify these locations and perform direct
examinations
Shear stress is key element
Total pressure
Inclination angle at pipe location (topography)
Flow rate
61
Shear Stress Gravity Balance
Gravity Effects < Shear No liquid hold-up
Stress
Gravity Effects = Shear Critical point

Stress
Gravity Effects > Shear Liquid hold-up

Stress
62
63
64
Confirmatory Direct Assessment
(CDA)
More focused application of Direct

Assessment
Applicable only to internal or external
corrosion on transmission lines
Rule allows CDA as method of performing
interim assessments for pipelines
Another method must be used if CDA
does not confirm the integrity of the
pipeline
65
Low-Stress Transmission
Pipelines (Section 192.941)
Pipelines operating < 30% SMYS

Option for interim re-assessment of low-stress
pipelines with alternative method to CDA
Applicable to internal and external corrosion
only
Does not exempt low-stress pipelines from
baseline assessment or 7 year re-assessment
intervals
but could extend interval up to 20 years between
recurring ILI, Pressure Test, or DA
66
What is the Low Stress
Reassessment Alternative?
Requires Operator to:

Implement additional Preventative &
Mitigative (P&M) measures outlined in
192.941
Refer to Tables E.II.1 (Not in an HCA but in a
Class 3 or 4 Area) and E.II.3 (HCAs)
NOTE: Initial baseline assessment with
ILI, PT, or DA is prerequisite
67
IMP Rule Re-Assessment
Intervals
192.939 and Table E.II.2 in

Appendix
Are the same for all primary
assessment methods
Direct Assessment
Pressure testing
In-line Inspection
68
Maximum Re-assessment Interval
192.939
Assessment Method Pipeline operating at or Pipeline operating at or Pipeline operating

above 50% SMYS above 30% SMYS, up to below 30% SMYS
50% SMYS
Internal Inspection Tool, 10 years(*) 15 years(*) 20 years(**)
Pressure Test or Direct
assessment
Confirmatory Direct 7 years 7 years 7 years

Assessment
Low stress Not applicable Not applicable 7 years + ongoing
reassessment actions specified in
§192.941
(*) A Confirmatory direct assessment as described in ' 192.931 must be conducted by year 7 in a 10-year
interval and years 7 and 14 of a 15-year interval.
(**) A low stress reassessment or Confirmatory direct assessment must be conducted by years 7 and 14
of the interval.
69
Re-assessment Table E.II.2
Table E.II.2 Assessment Requirements for Transmission Pipelines in HCAs (Re-assessment intervals are maximum allowed)
Re-Assessment Requirements (see Note 3)
At or above 30% SMYS
At or above 50% SMYS Below 30% SMYS
up to 50% SMYS
Max Max Max
Baseline Assessment
Re-Assessment Assessment Method Re-Assessment Assessment Method Re-Assessment Assessment Method
Method (see Note 3)
Interval Interval Interval
7 CDA 7 CDA
10 Pressure Test or ILI or DA Preventative & Mitigative (P&M)
Ongoing
Pressure Test or ILI or Measures
15(see Note 1) (see Table E.II.3), (see Note 2)
Pressure Testing DA (see Note 1)
Repeat inspection cycle
20
every 10 years Repeat inspection cycle Pressure Test or ILI or DA
every 15 years
Repeat inspection cycle every 20 years
7 CDA 7 CDA
10 ILI or DA or Pressure Test Preventative & Mitigative (P&M)
Ongoing
ILI or DA or Pressure Measures
In-Line Inspection 15(see Note 1) (see Table E.II.3), (see Note 2)
est (see Note 1)
20
every 10 years Repeat inspection cycle ILI or DA or Pressure Test
every 15 years
7 CDA 7 CDA
10 DA or ILI or Pressure Test Ongoing Preventative & Mitigative (P&M)
DA or ILI or Pressure Measures
15(see Note 1) (see Table E.II.3), (see Note 2)
Direct Assessment Test (see Note 1)
20
every 10 years Repeat inspection cycle DA or ILI or Pressure Test
every 15 years
Note 1: Operator may choose to utilize CDA at year 14, then utilize ILI, Pressure Test, or DA at year 15 as allowed under ASME B31.8S
Note 2: Operator may choose to utilize CDA at year 7 and 14 in lieu of P&M
Note 3: Operator may utilize “other technology that an operator demonstrates can provide an equivalent understanding of the condition of line pipe”
70
Summary of Assessment Methods
Baseline and Comprehensive Re-
Assessment Methods
In-Line Inspection (ILI)
Subpart J Pressure Test
Direct Assessment
Other Technology (if pre-approved)
Interim Re-Assessment Methods
Confirmatory Direct Assessment
Low-Stress Alternative
71
(a) General
Address all anomalous conditions
discovered through integrity assessment
Evaluate anomalous conditions and
remediate those that could reduce a
pipeline’s integrity
Demonstrate remediation is sufficient to
maintain integrity until the next
reassessment
72
(a) (1)
TEMPORARY PRESSURE REDUCTION:
If an Operator is unable to respond within the time limits for
certain conditions, the Operator must temporarily reduce the
operating pressure or take other action that ensures the safety of
the covered segment
Operator must determine temporary pressure reduction using
B31.G or RSTRENG, or to a level not exceeding 80% of operating
pressure at the time the condition was discovered
Operator must notify PHMSA (§ 192.949) if it cannot meet the
schedule for evaluation and remediation AND cannot provide
safety through pressure reduction or another action. Also notify
State in certain cases
73
(a) (2)
LONG-TERM PRESSURE REDUCTION:
When a pressure reduction exceeds 365 days, the
operator must notify PHMSA under § 192.949 and
explain the reasons for the remediation delay
This notice must include a technical justification that
the continued pressure reduction will not jeopardize
the integrity of the pipeline.
The operator also must notify a State pipeline safety
authority when either a covered segment is located in
a State where PHMSA has an interstate agent
agreement, or an intrastate covered segment is
regulated by that State.
74
(b)
Discover of a condition occurs when an Operator has
adequate information about the condition to
determine that the condition represents a potential
threat to the integrity of the pipeline (includes but
not limited to (d)(1) through (d)(3) in §192.933)
An Operator must promptly, but no later than 180
days after conducting an integrity assessment, obtain
sufficient information about a condition to make that
determination, unless the operator demonstrates that
the 180-day period is impracticable
75
(c)
Complete remediation according to a schedule
prioritizing conditions for evaluation and remediation.
Follow the schedule in ASME/ANSI B31.8S (§192.7),
section 7, Figure 4. Unless special requirements for
remediating certain conditions applies, as provided in
paragraph (d) of this section.
If an operator cannot meet the schedule for any
condition, the operator must explain the reasons why
it cannot meet the schedule and how the changed
schedule will not jeopardize public safety.
76
ASME B31.8 Appendix S – Section 7, Figure 4
77
(d)
(1) Immediate repair conditions

(2) One-year conditions
(3) Monitored conditions
78
79
192.933 (d)(1)
Require a reduction in operating

pressure or pipeline shutdown until
operator completes repair of these
conditions
Must follow schedule for in
ASME/ANSI B31.8S, Section 7
80
192.933 (d)(1)
Predicted failure (Pf) pressure to 1.1
times MAOP
ASME/ANSI B31G or RSTRENG or equivalent
method
A dent that has any indication of metal loss,
cracking or a stress riser
An indication or anomaly that in the
judgment of the person designated by the
Operator to evaluate the assessment results
requires immediate action
81
ASME B31.8S states that Immediate conditions shall be
examined within five days after determination of
thecondition. Is this 5 day requirement part of the Final
Rule?
Yes. This requirement appears in Section 7 of ASME/ANSI B31.8S,

which is specifically referenced in 192.933(d)(1), and thus
becomes part of the rule. It applies to examination of the
defect. However, the rule also requires that pressure be
reduced once an immediate repair condition is
discovered (see 192.933(d)(1)). Pressure reductions should be
taken promptly.
The rule also specifies (192.933(c)):
"...If an operator cannot meet the schedule for any condition,
the operator must justify the reasons why it cannot meet the
schedule and that the changed schedule will not jeopardize
public safety. An operator must notify OPS in accordance with
§192.949 if it cannot provide safety through a temporary
reduction in operating pressure or other action...."
82
ASME B31.8S states that Immediate conditions shall be
examined within five days after determination of
thecondition. Is this 5 day requirement part of the Final
Rule?
Thus, an operator is required to examine immediate

repair conditions within 5 days. If an operator cannot do
so, it must document its justification for why it cannot
and how continued safety is assured. Operators need
only notify PHMSA of their inability to examine
immediate repair conditions within 5 days if they cannot
reduce pressure. Operators must take additional action
(e.g., complete examination of the defect) within 365
days or document additional "technical justification that
the continued pressure reduction will not jeopardize the
integrity of the pipeline." (192.933(a)).
83
One-year Conditions 192.933 (d)(2)
Smooth dent located from 8 o’clock to 4 o’clock

(upper 2/3 of pipe)
>6% of pipeline’s diameter (or 0.5” in depth
for pipeline diameter less than NPS 12”)
A dent with depth greater than 2% of pipeline’s
diameter (or 0.25” in depth for pipeline diameter
less than NPS 12”) in an area that affects the
curvature of a girth weld or longitudinal
seam weld (*)
84
Monitored Conditions 192.933 (d)(3)
Operator does not have to schedule

these conditions for remediation, but
Must record and monitor the conditions
during subsequent risk and integrity
assessments for any change that may
require remediation
85
Monitored Conditions 192.933 (d)(3)
Dent from 4 o’clock to 8 o’clock (lower 1/3 of pipe)
depth greater than 6% of pipe diameter (or 0.5” in depth for
pipeline diameter less than NPS 12”)
Dent from 8 o’clock to 4 o’clock (upper 2/3 of pipe)
depth greater than 6% of pipe diameter (or 0.5” in depth for
pipeline diameter less than NPS 12”) AND ENGINEERING
ANALYSIS OF THE DENT DEMONSTRATE CRITICAL STRAIN
LEVELS ARE NOT EXCEEDED
Dent with a depth greater than 2% of the pipeline's diameter
(0.250 inches in depth for a pipeline diameter less than NPS 12)
that affects pipe curvature at a girth weld or a longitudinal
seam weld, AND ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF THE DENT AND
GIRTH OR SEAM WELD DEMONSTRATE CRITICAL STRAIN
LEVELS ARE NOT EXCEEDED. THESE ANALYSIS MUST INCLIDE
WELD PROPERTIES
86
Other Segments Outside of HCAs
Requires Operators to use risk process

in B31.8S as basis for deciding when
actions need to be taken for pipeline
segments outside of HCAs
87
Waivers
Operators can seek a waiver from
reassessment interval of 7 years for HCA
segment under two circumstances only
Lack of internal inspection tool
Maintain product supply
180 day period for Waiver, except when
local product supply issues make that
period impractical
88
89
90
91
92
93
Notifications:
Changes to IM Program
Must notify OPS when changes made to IM
program
Only of changes that substantially affect the
program’s implementation or significantly modify
the program or schedule for carrying out program
elements (Not minor or editorial changes)
Operator must provide the notification within 30
days after adopting this type of change into its
program
Must notify State Pipeline Agency when segment
is located in State where OPS has an interstate
agent agreement
94
Notifications:
Use of Other Technology
Operator must notify OPS 180 days before

conducting the assessment with other
technology
Must notify State Pipeline Agency when
segment is located in State where OPS has an
interstate agent agreement
95
Notifications:
Evaluation & Remediation
If an operator cannot meet the schedule for any

condition, the operator must justify the reasons why
it cannot meet the schedule and that the changed
schedule will not jeopardize public safety
An operator must notify OPS if it cannot meet the
schedule and cannot provide safety through a
temporary reduction in operating pressure or other
action
An operator must also notify a State or local pipeline
safety authority when either a covered segment is
located in a State where OPS has an interstate agent
agreement
96
What requirements must an operator meet if there
are no high consequence areas on any of its
transmission pipelines?
Have a process to periodically evaluate pipelines to

identify any new HCAs
Completed an evaluation to determine that no high
consequence areas exist
must be maintained & available for inspection
Submit findings in Annual Report Form
indicating no HCAs on its system
For transmission pipelines operating below 30%
SMYS in class 3 or 4 locations but not in an HCA,
enhanced protection against third-party damage
must be implemented in accordance with 192.935(d)
97
Expansion of Requirements to
Non-Covered Segments
Some provisions require expansion of certain

measures to non-covered segments if
Corrosion found in general on covered segment
that could adversely affect integrity
Corrosion found from ICDA in a covered segment
and similar conditions exist on a non covered
segment
Performance base option applying lessons learned
from covered segments to non covered segments
98
Communications Plan
Rule requires IM plans to include

Communication Plans, final rule
incorporates guidelines in B31.8S by
reference
99
Gas IM Related
192.150 Passage of Internal Inspection

Devices
Requires transmission lines to be designed
to accommodate the passage of internal
inspection devices
See regulation for some specific exceptions
100
Automatic Shut-off Valve (ASV)
or Remote Control Valve (RCV)
Rule requires Operators to determine, based upon risk analysis,
if it would be an efficient means of adding protection to a HCA
in the event of a gas release
In making that determination, an Operator must, at least,
consider the following factors;
swiftness of leak detection and pipe shutdown capabilities
the type of gas being transported
operating pressure
the rate of potential release
pipeline profile
the potential for ignition
and location of nearest response personnel.
Results of this evaluation should be documented and available
for review during OPS inspections 101
Leak Detection Systems
OPS will not prescriptively require

Operators to install leak detection
systems along pipelines
102
Plastic Transmission Pipeline
Most of the requirements of the Final rule are
applicable to metal pipelines, not plastic
Only certain parts apply to plastic
transmission lines
Requirements for continuing threat analysis
(192.917, 192.937)
Baseline assessment if a threat other than 3rd
party damage is identified (192.921)
Additional preventive and mitigative measures
(192.935)
103
§192.935 Additional Preventative
& Mitigative Measures
Operator must take additional
measures beyond those already
required by Part 192
to prevent a pipeline failure and
mitigate the consequences of a pipeline
failure in a high consequence area
Operator must base the additional
measures on the threats the
operator has identified to each
pipeline segment 104
§192.935 Additional Preventative
& Mitigative Measures (cont.)
Operator must conduct a risk analysis of its pipeline to
identify additional measures to protect the high
consequence area and enhance public safety
Such additional measures include, but are not limited to;
Installing Automatic Shut-off Valves
Installing Remote Control Valves
Installing computerized monitoring and leak detection
systems
Replacing pipe segments with pipe of heavier wall
thickness
Providing additional training to personnel on response
procedures,
Conducting drills with local emergency responders; and
Implementing additional inspection and maintenance
programs
105
Part 192 Gas Integrity Management
Reporting Performance Measures
Subpart O. Pipeline Integrity Management
106
Part 192 Gas Integrity Management (IM)
Reporting Performance Measures
The process which included bi-annual

reporting of IM Performance Measures has
been revised
Revision date January 2011
The new process includes reporting of IM
Performance Measures within the standard
Annual Report
due March 15th each year
107
IM Annual Reporting Requirements
§192.945 What methods must an operator §192.951 Where does an operator file a
use to measure program effectiveness? report?
(a) General. An operator must include in An operator must send any performance
its integrity management program report required by this subpart to the —
methods to measure whether the (a) By mail to the Pipeline and Hazard-
program is effective in assessing and ous Materials Safety Administration, U.S.
evaluating the integrity of each covered Department of Transportation,
pipeline segment and in protecting the Information Resources Manager, PHP-10,
high consequence areas. These measures 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
must include the four overall Washington, DC 20590-0001;
performance measures specified in
ASME/ANSI B31.8S (incorpo-rated by (b) Via fax to (202) 366-4566; or
reference, see §192.7 of this part), (3) Through the online reporting system
section 9.4, and the specific measures for provided by PHMSA for electronic report-
each identified threat specified in ing available at the PHMSA Home Page at
ASME/ANSI B31.8S, Appendix A. An http://PHMSA.dot.gov.
operator must sub-mit the four overall
performance measures as part of the
annual report required by §191.17 of this
subchapter.
Performance Measure Summary
Pipeline HCA miles Onshore & Offshore

Mileage inspected and actions taken in
calendar year
ILI
Direct Assessments (by type)
ECDA, ICDA, SCCDA
Pressure Testing
Other Technologies
Total miles inspected all methods
109
Annual Report Form: Part A, Section 6
Annual Report Form: Part A, Section 8
First time report or not?

No changes from previous year’s general
information (HCA mileage, etc.)?
Change in last year’s reported information
due to correction(s)?
Change in last year’s reported information
due to one or more other changes?
Annual Report IM Specifics
Open Annual Report Form

Notice: This report is required by 49 CFR Part 191. Failure to report may result in a civil penalty not to exceed $100,000 for each violation Form Approved
for each day the violation continues up to a maximum of $1,000,000 as provided in 49 USC 60122. OMB No. 2137-0522
Expires: 01/31/2014
U.S. Department of Transportation ANNUAL REPORT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 20___ INITIAL REPORT
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
NATURAL OR OTHER GAS TRANSMISSION and SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
GATHERING SYSTEMS
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays
a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2137-0522. Public reporting for this collection
of information is estimated to be approximately 22 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering the data needed,
and completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Send comments
regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, PHMSA, Office of Pipeline Safety (PHP-30) 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, D.C. 20590.
Important: Please read the separate instructions for completeing this form before you begin.
PART A - OPERATOR INFORMATION DOT USE ONLY
1. OPERATOR’S 5 DIGIT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (OPID) 2. NAME OF COMPANY OR ESTABLISHMENT:

/ / / / / /
IF SUBSIDIARY, NAME OF PARENT:

__________________________________________________
3. INDIVIDUAL WHERE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE 4. HEADQUARTERS ADDRESS:

OBTAINED:
Name Company Name
Title Street Address

__________________________________________________
Email Address
State: / / / Zip Code: / / / / / / - / / / / /
/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/__/ /__/__/__/-/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/__/
Telephone Number Telephone Number
5. THIS REPORT PERTAINS TO THE FOLLOWING COMMODITY GROUP: (Select Commodity Group based on the predominant gas carried
and complete the report for that Commodity Group. File a separate report for each Commodity Group included in this OPID.)
Natural Gas
Synthetic Gas
Hydrogen Gas
Propane Gas
Other Gas Name of Other Gas ___________________
6. CHARACTERIZE THE PIPELINES AND/OR PIPELINE FACILITIES COVERED BY THIS OPID AND COMMODITY GROUP WITH
RESPECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH PHMSA’S INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REGULATIONS (49 CFR 192 Subpart O). (Select
only one)
NO portions of the pipelines and/or pipeline facilities covered by this OPID and Commodity
Group are included in an Integrity Management Program subject to 49 CFR 192. If this box is
checked, leave PARTs B, F, G, and the “HCA” portions of M1 blank, but complete all remaining
PARTs of this form in accordance with PART A, Question 8.
Portions of SOME OR ALL of the pipelines and/or pipeline facilities covered by this OPID and
Commodity Group are included in an Integrity Management Program subject to 49 CFR 192. If
this box is checked, complete all PARTs of this form in accordance with PART A, Question 8.
Form PHMSA F 7100.2-1 (Rev. 01/2011) Pg. 1 of 13

Reproduction of this form is permitted.
Expires: 01/31/2014
7. FOR THE DESIGNATED “COMMODITY GROUP”, THE PIPELINES AND/OR PIPELINE FACILITIES INCLUDED WITHIN THIS OPID
ARE: (Select one or both)
INTERstate pipeline List all of the States in which INTERstate pipelines and/or pipeline
facilities included under this OPID exist: __, __, __, __, __, etc.
INTRAstate pipeline List all of the States in which INTRAstate pipelines and/or pipeline
facilities included under this OPID exist: __, __, __, __, __, etc.
8. DOES THIS REPORT REPRESENT A CHANGE FROM LAST YEAR’S FINAL REPORTED NUMBERS FOR ONE OR MORE OF THE
FOLLOWING PARTs: PART B, D, E, H, I, J, K, or L? (For calendar year 2010 reporting or if this is a first-time Report for an operator or
OPID, Commodity Group(s), or pipelines and/or pipeline facilities, select the first box only. For subsequent years’ reporting, select either No or
one or both of the Yes choices.)
This report is FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2010 reporting or is a FIRST-TIME REPORT and,
therefore, the remaining choices in this Question 8 do not apply. Complete all remaining
PARTS of this form as applicable.
NO, there are NO CHANGES from last year’s final reported information for PARTs B, D, E,
H, I, J, K, or L. Complete PARTs A, C, M, and N, along with PARTs F, G, and O when
applicable.
YES, this report represents a CHANGE FROM LAST YEAR’S FINAL REPORTED
INFORMATION for one or more of PARTs B, D, E, H, I, J, K, or L due to corrected
information; however, the pipelines and/or pipeline facilities and operations are the same as
those which were covered under last year’s report. Complete PARTs A, C, M, and N, along
with only those other PARTs which changed (including PARTs B, F, G, and O when applicable).
YES, this report represents a CHANGE FROM LAST YEAR’S FINAL REPORTED
INFORMATION for PARTs B, D, E, H, I, J, K, or L because of one or more of the following
change(s) in pipelines and/or pipeline facilities and/or operations from those which were
covered under last year’s report. Complete PARTs A, C, M, and N, along with only those other
PARTs which changed (including PARTs B, F, G, and O when applicable). (Select all reasons
for these changes from the following list)
Merger of companies and/or operations, acquisition of pipelines and/or

pipeline facilities
Divestiture of pipelines and/or pipeline facilities
New construction or new installation of pipelines and/or pipeline facilities
Conversion to service, change in commodity transported, or change in MAOP
(maximum allowable operating pressure).
Abandonment of existing pipelines and/or pipeline facilities
Change in HCA’s identified, HCA Segments, or other changes to Operator’s
Integrity Management Program
Change in OPID
Other Describe: _____________________________________________

Expires: 01/31/2014
For the designated Commodity Group, complete PARTs B, C, D, and E one time for all pipelines and/or
pipeline facilities – both INTERstate and INTRAstate - included within this OPID.
PART B – TRANSMISSION PIPELINE HCA MILES
Number of HCA Miles

in the IMP Program
Onshore
Offshore
Total Miles
PART C - VOLUME TRANSPORTED IN TRANSMISSION Check this box and proceed to PART D without completing this
PIPELINES (ONLY) IN MILLION SCF PER YEAR PART C if this report only includes gathering pipelines or transmission
(excludesTransmission lines of Gas Distribution systems) lines of gas distribution systems.
Onshore Offshore
Natural Gas
Propane Gas
Synthetic Gas
Hydrogen Gas
Other Gas Name: ____________________
PART D - MILES OF STEEL PIPE BY CORROSION PROTECTION
Cathodically protected Cathodically unprotected

Total Miles
Bare Coated Bare Coated
Transmission
Onshore
Offshore
Subtotal Transmission
Gathering
Onshore Type A
Onshore Type B
Offshore
Subtotal Gathering
Total Miles

Expires: 01/31/2014
PART E - MILES OF non-STEEL PIPE BY TYPE AND LOCATION

Cast Iron
Wrought Iron Pipe Plastic Pipe Other Pipe Total Miles
Pipe
Transmission
Onshore
Offshore
Gathering
Onshore Type A
Onshore Type B
Offshore
Subtotal Gathering
Total Miles

Expires: 01/31/2014
For the designated Commodity Group, complete PARTs F and G one time for all INTERstate pipelines
and/or pipeline facilities included within this OPID and multiple times as needed for the designated
Commodity Group for each State in which INTRAstate pipelines and/or pipeline facilities included within
this OPID exist. Each time these sections are completed, designate the State to which the data applies for
INTRAstate pipelines and/or pipeline facilities, or that it applies to all INTERstate pipelines included within
this Commodity Group and OPID.
PARTs F and G
The data reported in these PARTs F and G applies to: (select only one)
Interstate pipelines/pipeline facilities
Intrastate pipelines/pipeline facilities in the State of /__/__/ (complete for each State)
PART F - INTEGRITY INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED AND ACTIONS TAKEN BASED ON INSPECTION
1. MILEAGE INSPECTED IN CALENDAR YEAR USING THE FOLLOWING IN-LINE INSPECTION (ILI) TOOLS
a. Corrosion or metal loss tools
b. Dent or deformation tools
c. Crack or long seam defect detection tools
d. Any other internal inspection tools
e. Total tool mileage inspected in calendar year using in-line inspection tools. (Lines a + b + c + d )
2. ACTIONS TAKEN IN CALENDAR YEAR BASED ON IN-LINE INSPECTIONS
a. Based on ILI data, total number of anomalies excavated in calendar year because they met the operator’s
criteria for excavation.
b. Total number of anomalies repaired in calendar year that were identified by ILI based on the operator’s criteria,
both within an HCA Segment and outside of an HCA Segment.
c. Total number of conditions repaired WITHIN AN HCA SEGMENT meeting the definition of:
1. “Immediate repair conditions” [192.933(d)(1)]
2. “One-year conditions” [192.933(d)(2)]
3. “Monitored conditions” [192.933(d)(3)]
4. Other “Scheduled conditions” [192.933(c)]
3. MILEAGE INSPECTED AND ACTIONS TAKEN IN CALENDAR YEAR BASED ON PRESSURE TESTING
a. Total mileage inspected by pressure testing in calendar year.
b. Total number of pressure test failures (ruptures and leaks) repaired in calendar year, both within an HCA
Segment and outside of an HCA Segment.
c. Total number of pressure test ruptures (complete failure of pipe wall) repaired in calendar year WITHIN AN HCA
SEGMENT.
d. Total number of pressure test leaks (less than complete wall failure but including escape of test medium)
repaired in calendar year WITHIN AN HCA SEGMENT.
(PART F continued)

Expires: 01/31/2014
4. MILEAGE INSPECTED AND ACTIONS TAKEN IN CALENDAR YEAR BASED ON DA (Direct Assessment methods)
a. Total mileage inspected by each DA method in calendar year.

1. ECDA
2. ICDA
3. SCCDA
b. Total number of anomalies identified by each DA method and repaired in calendar year based on the operator’s
criteria, both within an HCA Segment and outside of an HCA Segment.
1. ECDA
2. ICDA
3. SCCDA
c. Total number of conditions repaired in calendar year WITHIN AN HCA SEGMENT meeting the definition of:
5. MILEAGE INSPECTED AND ACTIONS TAKEN IN CALENDAR YEAR BASED ON OTHER INSPECTION TECHNIQUES
a. Total mileage inspected by inspection techniques other than those listed above in calendar year.
b. Total number of anomalies identified by other inspection techniques and repaired in calendar year based on the
operator’s criteria, both within an HCA Segment and outside of an HCA Segment.
c. Total number of conditions repaired in calendar year WITHIN AN HCA SEGMENT meeting the definition of:
6. TOTAL MILEAGE INSPECTED (ALL METHODS) AND ACTIONS TAKEN IN CALENDAR YEAR
a. Total mileage inspected in calendar year. (Lines 1.e + 3.a + 4.a.1 + 4.a.2 + 4.a.3 + 5.a)
b. Total number of anomalies repaired in calendar year both within an HCA Segment and outside of an HCA
Segment. (Lines 2.b + 3.b + 4.b.1 + 4.b.2 + 4.b.3 + 5.b)
c. Total number of conditions repaired in calendar year WITHIN AN HCA SEGMENT. (Lines 2.c.1 + 2.c.2 + 2.c.3
+ 2.c.4 + 3.c + 3.d + 4.c.1 + 4.c.2 + 4.c.3 + 4.c.4 + 5.c.1 + 5.c.2 + 5.c.3 + 5.c.4)
PART G– MILES OF BASELINE ASSESSMENTS AND REASSESSMENTS COMPLETED IN CALENDAR YEAR (HCA Segment miles
ONLY)
a. Baseline assessment miles completed during the calendar year.
b. Reassessment miles completed during the calendar year.
c. Total assessment and reassessment miles completed during the calendar year.

Expires: 01/31/2014
For the designated Commodity Group, complete PARTs H, I, J, K, L, and M covering INTERstate pipelines
and/or pipeline facilities for each State in which INTERstate systems exist within this OPID and again
covering INTRAstate pipelines and/or pipeline facilities for each State in which INTRAstate systems exist
within this OPID.
PARTs H, I, J, K, L, and M
The data reported in these PARTs H, I, J, K, L, and M applies to: (select only one)
Interstate pipelines/pipeline facilities in the State of /__/__/ (complete for each State)
Intrastate Pipelines/pipeline facilities in the State of /__/__/ (complete for each State)
PART H - MILES OF TRANSMISSION PIPE BY NOMINAL PIPE SIZE (NPS)
NPS 4”
6” 8” 10” 12” 14” 16” 18” 20”
or less
22” 24” 26” 28” 30” 32” 34” 36” 38”
Onshore
58” and Other Pipe Sizes
42” 44” 46” 48” 52” 56”
over Not Listed
Size: __ Miles: ________

Add Sizes as needed
Total Miles of Onshore Pipe - Transmission

NPS 4”
6” 8” 10” 12” 14” 16” 18” 20”
or less
22” 24” 26” 28” 30” 32” 34” 36” 38”
Offshore
42” 44” 46” 48” 52” 56”
over Not Listed
Size: __ Miles: ________

Add Sizes as needed
Total Miles of Offshore Pipe - Transmission

Expires: 01/31/2014
PART I - MILES OF GATHERING PIPE BY NOMINAL PIPE SIZE (NPS)
NPS 4”
6” 8” 10” 12” 14” 16” 18” 20”
or less
22” 24” 26” 28” 30” 32” 34” 36” 38”

Onshore
Type A
42” 44” 46” 48” 52” 56”
over Not Listed
Size: __ Miles: ________

Add Sizes as needed
Total Miles of Onshore Type A Pipe - Gathering

NPS 4”
6” 8” 10” 12” 14” 16” 18” 20”
or less
22” 24” 26” 28” 30” 32” 34” 36” 38”

Onshore
Type B
42” 44” 46” 48” 52” 56”
over Not Listed
Size: __ Miles: ________

Add Sizes as needed
Total Miles of Onshore Type B Pipe - Gathering
NPS 4”
6” 8” 10” 12” 14” 16” 18” 20”
or less
22” 24” 26” 28” 30” 32” 34” 36” 38”

Offshore

42” 44” 46” 48” 52” 56”
over Not Listed
Size: __ Miles: ________

Add Sizes as needed
Total Miles of Offshore Pipe - Gathering

Expires: 01/31/2014
PART J – MILES OF PIPE BY DECADE INSTALLED
Pre-40 or
Decade Pipe Installed 1940 - 1949 1950 - 1959 1960 - 1969 1970 - 1979 1980 - 1989
Unknown
Transmission
Onshore
Offshore
Gathering
Onshore Type A
Onshore Type B
Offshore
Subtotal Gathering
Total Miles
Decade Pipe Installed 1990 - 1999 2000 - 2009 2010 - 2019 Total Miles
Transmission
Onshore
Offshore
Gathering
Onshore Type A
Onshore Type B
Offshore
Subtotal Gathering
Total Miles

Expires: 01/31/2014
PART K- MILES OF TRANSMISSION PIPE BY SPECIFIED MINIMUM YIELD STRENGTH
CLASS LOCATION
ONSHORE Total Miles
Class I Class 2 Class 3 Class 4
Less than or equal to

20% SMYS
Greater than 20% SMYS but
less than or equal to
30% SMYS
40% SMYS
50% SMYS
60% SMYS
72% SMYS
80% SMYS
Greater than 80% SMYS
Unknown percent of SMYS
All Non-Steel pipe
Onshore Totals
OFFSHORE Class I
Less than or equal to

50% SMYS
72% SMYS
Offshore Total
Total Miles

Expires: 01/31/2014
PART L - MILES OF PIPE BY CLASS LOCATION
Class Location Total HCA Miles in

Class Location the IMP
Class I Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Miles Program
Transmission
Onshore
Offshore
Gathering
Onshore Type A
Onshore Type B
Offshore
Subtotal Gathering
Total Miles

Expires: 01/31/2014
PART M – INCIDENTS, FAILURES, LEAKS, AND REPAIRS
PART M1 – ALL LEAKS ELIMINATED/REPAIRED IN CALENDAR YEAR; INCIDENTS & FAILURES IN HCA SEGMENTS IN
CALENDAR YEAR
Transmission Incidents, Leaks, and Failures Gathering Leaks

Incidents Leaks Failures Onshore Offshore
in HCA in HCA Leaks Leaks
Onshore Leaks Offshore Leaks
Segments Segments
Type Type
HCA Non-HCA HCA Non-HCA
Cause A B
External Corrosion
Internal Corrosion
Stress Corrosion
Cracking
Manufacturing
Construction
Equipment
Incorrect Operations
Third Party Damage/Mechanical Damage
Excavation Damage
Previous Damage (due
to Excavation Activity)
Vandalism (includes all
Intentional Damage)
Weather Related/Other Outside Force
Natural Force Damage
(all)
Other Outside Force
Damage (excluding
Vandalism and all
Intentional Damage)
Other
Total
PART M2 – KNOWN SYSTEM LEAKS AT END OF YEAR SCHEDULED FOR REPAIR
Transmission Gathering
PART M3 – LEAKS ON FEDERAL LAND OR OCS REPAIRED OR SCHEDULED FOR
REPAIR
Transmission Gathering
Onshore Type A
Onshore
Onshore Type B
OCS OCS
Subtotal Transmission Subtotal Gathering
Total

Expires: 01/31/2014
For the designated Commodity Group, complete PART N one time for all of the pipelines and/or pipeline
facilities included within this OPID, and then also PART O if any portion(s) of the pipelines and/or pipeline
facilities covered under this Commodity Group and OPID are included in an Integrity Management
Program subject to 49 CFR 192.
PART N - PREPARER SIGNATURE (applicable to all PARTs A - M)
/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/__/
Preparer's Name(type or print) Telephone Number
/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/__/
Preparer's Title Facsimile Number
Preparer's E-mail Address
PART O - CERTIFYING SIGNATURE (applicable only to PARTs B, F, G, and M1)
/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/-/__/__/__/__/
Senior Executive Officer’s signature certifying the information in PARTs B, F, G, and M as required by Telephone Number
49 U.S.C. 60109(f)
Senior Executive Officer’s name certifying the information in PARTs B, F, G, and M as required by
49 U.S.C. 60109(f)
Senior Executive Officer’s title certifying the information in PARTs B, F, G, and M as required by
49 U.S.C. 60109(f)
Senior Executive Officer’s E-mail Address

INSTRUCTIONS FOR FORM PHMSA F 7100.2-1 (Rev. Jan-2011)
ANNUAL REPORT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 20__
NATURAL OR OTHER GAS TRANSMISSION AND GATHERING SYSTEMS
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
All section references are to Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (49 CFR). The Natural or
Other Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems Annual Report has been revised as of calendar year
2010 affecting submissions for 2010 and beyond. Please read through the Annual Report and
instructions carefully before beginning to complete the Report. Where common data elements exist
between this Report and an operator’s NPMS submission, the data submitted by the operator on their
Annual Report should be the same as the data submitted through NPMS when possible. (Additionally,
and in order to align an operator’s NPMS submission with their Annual Report data, PHMSA suggests
that operators send their NPMS submission to PHMSA by March 15, representing pipeline assets as of
December 31 of the previous year.)
Annual Reports must be submitted by March 15 for the preceding calendar year. In order to
improve the accuracy of reported data, operators are requested to review prior years’ Reports in order
to validate that their reported numbers are accurate, or to identify and correct inconsistencies or errors
that are either found or that may exist in any previously reported data. Operators should file
Supplemental Reports as necessary, including those supplementing prior years’ Reports.
Each gas transmission system or regulated gathering pipeline operator is required to file an Annual
Report. The terms “operator,” “distribution line,” “gathering line,” “Maximum Allowable Operating
Pressure (MAOP),” “offshore,” “Outer Continental Shelf,” “pipe,” “pipeline,” “pipeline facility,”
“specified minimum yield strength (SMYS),” and “transmission line” are defined in § 192.3. The
terms “assessment,” and “high consequence area (HCA)” are defined in §195.903. § 192.8 describes
how to identify onshore gathering lines and to determine if a gathering line is subject to regulation (i.e.,
is a “regulated gathering line”). If an operator determines that its pipelines fall under the definition for
distribution lines, he or she should submit Form PHMSA F 7100.1-1 rather than this form.
If you need copies of the Form PHMSA F 7100.2-1 and/or instructions, they can be found on the
Pipeline Safety Community main page, http://phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline, by clicking Data and Statistics
and then selecting the Forms hyperlink. If you have questions about this Report or these instructions,
please call the PHMSA Information Resources Manager at (202) 366-8075.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 1 of 20

REPORTING METHOD
Annual Reports must be submitted online unless an alternate method is approved (see Alternate
Reporting Methods below). Use the following procedure:
1. Navigate to the Pipeline Safety Community main page,

http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline, click the ONLINE DATA ENTRY link listed.
2. Click on the Annual Gas Transmission & Gathering System Report link
3. Enter Operator Identification Number (OPID) and PIN. [If an operator does not
have an OPID or a PIN, the ONLINE DATA ENTRY page includes directions on
how to obtain one.]
4. Click Add to begin data entry for a new calendar year’s Report. [For Supplemental
Reports, click on the Report ID and select Modify to make corrections or add new
information.]
5. To save intermediate work without formally submitting it to PHMSA, click Save.
6. Click Submit when you have completed the Report (for either an Initial Report or a
Supplemental Report) and are ready to initiate formal submission of your Report to
PHMSA.
7. A confirmation page will appear for you to print and save for your records.
Alternate Reporting Methods
Operators for whom electronic reporting imposes an undue burden and hardship may submit a written
request for an alternative reporting method. Operators must follow the requirements in §191.7(c) to
request an alternative reporting method and must comply with any conditions imposed as part of
PHMSA’s approval of an alternate reporting method.
SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS
Make an entry in each block for which data is available. Estimate data only if necessary. Avoid
entering any data as UNKNOWN or 0 (zero) except where zero is appropriate to indicate that there
were no instances or amounts of the attribute being reported.
Do not report miles of pipe, pipe segments, or pipeline in feet. When reporting mileages that are less
than 1 mile or when reporting portions of a mile, convert feet into a decimal notation (e.g. 2,640 feet =
.5 miles) and report mileage using decimals rounded to the nearest tenth of a mile. Operators may
round all mileages that are greater than 1 mile to the nearest mile. Do not use fractions.
Enter the Calendar Year for which the Report is being filed, bearing in mind that reporting
requirements are for the preceding calendar year (i.e., for the March 15, 2011 deadline, the Report
should provide information for assets as they existed at the end of the 2010 calendar year).
Rev. 1/2011 Page 2 of 20

Check Initial Report if this is the original filing for the calendar year. Check Supplemental Report
if this is a follow-up to a previously filed Report to amend or correct information for that calendar
year. On Supplemental Reports, enter all information requested in Parts A and N, and only the new or
revised information for the other Parts of the Report, completing Part O as required.
Report miles of pipe, pipe segments, or pipeline in the system at the end of the reporting year,
including any additions or deletions to the system occurring during that year. Report other data for the
duration of the calendar year as appropriate. Adhere to definitions in 49 CFR 192 when reporting
mileage and other data.
PART A – OPERATOR INFORMATION
Complete all 8 sections of Part A before continuing to the next Part.
1. Operator’s 5-digit Identification Number (OPID)
All operators that meet the definition of an “operator” under § 192.3 must have a PHMSA-assigned
Operator Identification Number (also known as an OPID). If the person completing the Report
does not know the OPID for the system being reported, this information may be requested from the
PHMSA Information Resources Manager at (202) 366-8075. (See instructions on the ONLINE
DATA ENTRY page as described above.)
2. Name of Company or Establishment
This is the company name used when registering for an OPID and PIN in the Online Data Entry
System. When completing the Report online, the Name of Operator is automatically filled in based
on the OPID entered in Part A, Question 1. If the name that appears does not coincide with the
OPID, contact the PHMSA Information Resources Manager.
If the company corresponding to the OPID is a subsidiary, enter the name of the parent company.
3. Individual where additional information may be obtained
Enter the name, title, email address and telephone number of the individual who should be
contacted if additional information regarding this Report submission is needed.
4. Headquarters address
Enter the address and phone number of the operator’s corporate headquarters.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 3 of 20

5. This Report pertains to the following Commodity Group
It is a PHMSA requirement that operators submit individual Reports by Commodity Group.
File a separate Report for each of the following Commodity Groups:
Natural Gas
Synthetic Gas (Examples include landfill gas, biogas, and manufactured gas based on
naphtha)
Hydrogen Gas
Propane Gas
Other Gas – If this Commodity Group is selected, report the name of the other gas in the
space provided.
Note: When a single pipeline serves as two or more of the above Commodity Groups, that pipeline
should be reported only once, reporting within the Commodity Group for the commodity that is
transported most predominantly.
6. Integrity Management Program
Indicate here whether any portion(s) of the pipelines and/or pipeline facilities for this Commodity
Group covered under this OPID are subject to the integrity management (IM) requirements of 49
CFR 192, Subpart O.
Pipelines and/or pipeline facilities that include high consequence areas (HCAs) are required to be
in an IM Program in accordance with Subpart O. For the purposes of this question and, more
generally, this Report, do not consider pipelines or portions of pipelines that could otherwise not
affect an HCA but which are included in an IM Program as a result of other PHMSA directives
(such as Corrective Action Orders, Compliance Orders, Special Permits, etc.). Check the box
indicating that portions of SOME or ALL of the pipelines and/or pipeline facilities covered under
this OPID are included in an IM Program as required by Subpart O, and complete other Parts of
this Report in accordance with Part A, Question 8.
If NO PORTIONS of the pipelines and/or pipeline facilities covered under this OPID are included
in an IM Program as required by Subpart O, check the box indicating such. In this case, Parts B, F,
G, the “HCA” portions of M1, and O need not be completed.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 4 of 20

7. Interstate and/or Intrastate pipeline
Pipeline assets included within a particular Commodity Group under a single OPID may be either
interstate, intrastate, or both. Check the appropriate box or boxes to indicate whether the pipelines
and/or pipeline facilities for the OPID and Commodity Group are interstate or intrastate or both.
List the two-letter state abbreviation for each state in which reported interstate and intrastate assets
are located.
Interstate pipeline means a pipeline or that part of a pipeline that is used to transport gas and is
subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) under the Natural
Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.).
Interstate pipeline means a pipeline or that part of a pipeline that is used to transport gas and is
subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) under the Natural
Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.).
8. Does this Report represent a change from last year’s final reported information for one or
more of the following Parts?
Check “This Report is for calendar year 2010 reporting or is a first-time Report…” only for the
reporting of calendar year 2010 information, including any supplements to that information, or if
this is a first-time Report. Because this revision of the Annual Report will be used for the first time
to report information for calendar year 2010, some of the “Parts” of this Report referred to in this
question are new and, therefore, no comparable information will have been reported for the prior
year. For calendar year 2010 only, respond to this question by selecting the box “This Report is for
calendar year 2010 reporting or is a first-time Report…”, and then complete all remaining Parts of
the Report as applicable. Similarly, if no Annual Report has been previously filed for this operator,
OPID, Commodity Group, or pipelines and/or pipeline facilities, or for other reasons, select the box
“This Report is for calendar year 2010 reporting or is a first-time Report…”, and then complete all
remaining Parts of the Report as applicable.
For calendar year submissions beyond 2010, an option has been created to allow the operator to
provide information for relevant Parts when certain portions of the information have not changed.
Check “No” if there are no changes in the information reported for the current reporting year
compared against the prior calendar year for Parts B, D, E, H, I, J, K, or L for the Commodity
Group reported.
It should be noted that PHMSA expects that the data describing volume transported (Part C) and
integrity management activity (Parts F and G) will change each year. Therefore, Part C, describing
volume transported, must be completed by every operator every year. Additionally, those Parts of
this Report related to integrity management activity (Parts F, G and O) must be completed every
year by every operator with portions of pipelines and/or pipeline facilities subject to PHMSA’s IM
Rev. 1/2011 Page 5 of 20

regulations as indicated in Part A, Question 6.
When there are changes in the information reported for the current reporting year compared against
the prior calendar year, these changes can occur for one of the two following reasons:
1) New information or new calculations may have changed the understanding of

pipeline and/or pipeline facility data, leading to differences in some data elements
reported on the Annual Report in the previous year’s Report, even though the physical
pipeline(s) and/or pipeline facility(ies) themselves have not changed; or
2) The pipeline(s) and/or pipeline facility(ies) may have changed – either physically or
operationally.
Check one or both of the two “Yes” boxes if reported system information has changed.
If the change is due to a change in the pipelines and/or pipeline facilities and/or
operations (number 2 above), check the appropriate box or boxes to indicate the nature
of the change(s). If “Other” is selected, provide a brief description of the change.
• Merger/acquisition involves a change in ownership or operating responsibility that

would likely result in increases or other changes in the reported miles of pipeline in
most Parts of the Report.
• Divestiture involves a change in ownership or operating responsibility that would

likely result in decreases or other changes in the reported miles of pipeline.
• New construction or new installation that would likely result in increases or other
changes in the reported miles of pipeline, including rerouting of pipelines.
• Conversion of service, change in commodity transported, or change in MOP

(maximum operating pressure).
• Conversion to service means conversion to transportation of natural or

other gas under § 192.14 that would likely result in increases or other
changes in the reported miles of pipeline. (This is selected if a
pipeline that was previously used to transport a commodity or
material that was not covered under 49 CFR 191/192, such as water,
is being converted to move a commodity that is covered under 49
CFR 191/2 such as a propane gas line.)
• Change in commodity transported means a change in the commodity

predominately transported and thus in the “Commodity Group”
reported in Part A, Question 6. (This is selected if the previous
commodity moved in a pipeline covered under 49 CFR 191/192 is
Rev. 1/2011 Page 6 of 20

changed to a different commodity moved under 49 CFR 191/192, for

example a natural gas line being changed to a synthetic gas line.)
• Change in MAOP (maximum allowable operating pressure) could

result in changes to the mileage of pipeline operating in different
categories of hoop stress (i.e., percent SMYS (Specified Minimum
Yield Strength)) as reported in Part K.
• “Abandoned,” as defined in § 192.3, means permanently removed from service.

All pipeline mileage not permanently removed from service should be reported,
including pipelines and/or pipeline facilities considered to be idled.
• Change in various aspects of an operator’s IM Program may result in changes to

information reported in Parts B, F, and/or G.
• Change in an operator’s OPID number – or changes in pipelines and/or pipeline

facilities covered by a particular OPID number - may result in changes throughout
the Annual Report.
For the designated Commodity Group, complete Parts B, C, D, and E one time for all pipelines
and/or pipeline facilities – both INTERstate or INTRAstate – included within this OPID.
Separate reporting by state is not required for these Parts. Data reported should represent the
system in total, including all states in which system assets are located.
PART B – TRANSMISSION PIPELINE HCA MILES
Report in Part B the total miles of Onshore and Offshore pipe that are high consequence areas (HCAs).
Do not include miles of pipeline that are not HCAs but which are included in the IM Program as a
result of other PHMSA directives (such as Corrective Action Orders, Compliance Orders, Special
Permits, etc.). This Part should be left blank if no portions of the pipelines and/or pipeline facilities
covered by this OPID are in an IM Program, as indicated in Part A, Question 6.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 7 of 20

PART C - VOLUME TRANSPORTED IN TRANSMISSION PIPELINES (ONLY) IN

MILLION SCF PER YEAR (excludes Transmission lines of Gas Distribution systems)
Report the volume transported in transmission pipelines during the calendar year for this Commodity
Group, in millions of standard cubic feet (60ºF and 14.73psia). Include the annual total volume
transported for all states and for all pipelines and/or pipeline facilities – both INTERstate or
INTRAstate – included within this OPID and for this Commodity Group. Volumes of any Commodity
Group transported in addition to the Commodity Group predominately transported through these
pipelines and/or pipeline facilities should also be reported in Part C within the proper row.
Note: This Part does not need to be completed if the pipeline system corresponding to the OPID
reported in Part A, Question 1, includes only gathering pipelines or if the transmission line is operated
by a gas distribution company as an integral part of its distribution pipeline system. Operators whose
pipelines are limited to these types should check the box to so indicate.
PART D – MILES OF STEEL PIPE BY CORROSION PROTECTION
For steel pipe only, report the total miles of Onshore and Offshore Transmission and Gathering pipe
that is cathodically protected and cathodically unprotected subdivided, in each case, into the amount
that is bare and the amount that is coated pipe. COATED means pipe coated with an effective hot or
cold applied dielectric coating or wrapper. Enter zero (0) in any cell for which the pipeline system
includes no mileage. Do not leave any cells blank.
PART E – MILES OF non-STEEL PIPE BY TYPE AND LOCATION
For non-steel pipe only, report the total miles of Onshore and Offshore pipe that is of a material other
than steel. Enter zero (0) in any cell for which the pipeline system includes no mileage. Do not leave
any cells blank.
OTHER PIPE means a pipe made of a non-steel material not specifically designated on the form,
such as copper, aluminum, etc.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 8 of 20

For the designated Commodity Group, complete PARTs F and G one time for all INTERstate
pipelines and/or pipeline facilities included within this OPID and multiple times as needed for
the designated Commodity Group for each State in which INTRAstate pipelines and/or pipeline
facilities included within this OPID exist.
For example: Consider a set of natural gas pipeline systems that includes INTERstate pipeline
facilities in seven states and INTRAstate pipeline facilities in three states. Parts F and G should
be completed four times for this set of natural gas pipeline systems – once for all INTERstate
assets (combined) and once for the INTRAstate assets in each of the three states in which
INTRAstate assets are located (separately).
Each time Parts F and G are completed, indicate whether the data reported is for INTERstate or
INTRAstate pipelines and/or pipeline facilities. If INTRAstate, enter in the space provided the
two-letter postal abbreviation for the state.
PART F – INTEGRITY INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED AND ACTIONS TAKEN

BASED ON INSPECTION
This Part incorporates transmission pipeline integrity management performance measure reporting
required by § 192.945 and ASME/ANSI B31.8S, Section 9.4(b) (incorporated into the regulations by
reference), items 1-3. Report all integrity assessments (inspections) required by PHMSA’s IM
regulations which were conducted and actions which were taken during the calendar year based on
inspection results. Include all inspections conducted in the reporting period calendar year including
baseline assessments and re-assessments. Do not consider pipelines or portions of pipelines that could
otherwise not affect an HCA but which are included in an IM Program as a result of other PHMSA
directives (such as Corrective Action Orders, Compliance Orders, Special Permits, etc.). Part F is
subdivided into six (6) sections.
Section 1 - Mileage inspected in calendar year using the following In-Line Inspection (ILI)
tools.
Report the mileage inspected using each of the listed tool types. Include total miles
inspected, not just the mileage in high consequence areas (HCA). Where multiple ILI
tools are used (e.g., a metal loss tool and a deformation tool), report the mileage in both
categories. Where a combination tool is used (i.e., a single tool with multiple
capabilities), report the mileage separately in each category included as part of the
combination. Thus, the total mileage inspected during the calendar year (the sum of the
mileage reported for individual tools) may be greater than the actual number of physical
pipeline miles on which ILI inspections were run.
Enter zero (0) for any tool which was not used for IM assessments during the year.
Leave no rows blank.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 9 of 20
Section 2 - Actions taken in calendar year based on In-Line Inspections.
Include all actions taken during the calendar year that resulted from information
obtained during an ILI inspection. This should include actions taken as a result of
information developed during ILI inspections conducted during the calendar year PLUS
actions taken as a result of ILI inspections conducted during prior years and for which
all required actions were not completed during the year of the inspection. Do not
include actions which are anticipated based on review of ILI results but which did not
actually occur during the reporting year.
Report in items a. and b. the total number of anomalies excavated and repaired based on
the operator’s repair criteria even if those criteria are different from (i.e., require repair
of damage more or less significant) than the repair criteria in IM regulations applicable
to anomalies in HCA pipeline segments. (The operator’s criteria for anomalies in HCA
pipeline segments must be at least as conservative as those required by the regulations).
Report in a. the total number of anomalies excavated, recognizing that multiple

anomalies may be exposed in a single excavation.
Report in b. only those anomalies actually repaired, not those for which other mitigative
actions (not repair) were undertaken.
Report in c. only the anomalies in HCA pipeline segments that were repaired because
they met one of the repair criteria in the IM regulations. “Scheduled conditions” as
used in this section refers to anomalies that are required to be repaired in accordance
with the schedule in ASME/ANSI B31.8S, section 7, Figure 4 (see § 193.933(c)). (The
total of repairs reported in item c. should not exceed the total number of repairs reported
in item b.)
Enter a value in each row, using zero (0) as appropriate. Leave no rows blank.
Section 3 – Mileage inspected and actions taken in calendar year based on Pressure
Testing.
Report in a. total miles inspected by pressure testing, including both HCA mileage and
mileage outside HCA.
Report in b. the total number of test failures (ruptures and leaks) on all mileage tested
during the year.
Report in c. the ruptures and in d. the leaks repaired ONLY in HCA segments.
Enter a value in each row, using zero (0) as appropriate. Leave no rows blank. Enter
Rev. 1/2011 Page 10 of 20

zero (0) in all rows of section 3 if no IM assessments were conducted by pressure test
during the year.
Section 4 – Mileage inspected and actions taken in calendar year based on DA (Direct
Assessment).
Include all actions taken during the calendar year that resulted from information
obtained through external corrosion direct assessment, internal corrosion direct
assessment, and stress corrosion cracking direct assessment inspections. Include all
actions taken during the calendar year that resulted from information obtained during a
DA inspection. This should include actions taken as a result of information developed
during DA inspections conducted during the calendar year PLUS actions taken as a
result of DA inspections conducted during prior years and for which all required actions
were not completed during the year of the inspection. Do not include actions which are
anticipated based on DA inspection results but which did not actually occur during the
reporting year.
Report in b. the total number of anomalies excavated and repaired within an HCA
segment and outside an HCA segment based on the operator’s repair criteria even if
those criteria are different from (i.e., require repair of damage more or less significant)
than the repair criteria in IM regulations applicable to anomalies in HCA pipeline
segments. (The operator’s criteria for anomalies in HCA pipeline segments must be at
least as conservative as those required by the regulations).
Report in c. the number of anomalies identified in HCA pipeline segments that were
repaired because when excavated and examined they met one of the repair criteria in the
IM regulations.
Section 5 - Mileage inspected and actions taken in calendar year based on Other
Inspection Techniques.
IM regulations allow operators to use other assessment techniques provided that they
notify PHMSA (or states exercising regulatory jurisdiction) in advance. Report here the
mileage inspected and actions taken as a result of inspections conducted using any
technique other than those covered in Sections 1-4 of Part F.
As for the other techniques, include all actions taken during the calendar year that
resulted from information obtained during an inspection using another technique. This
should include actions taken as a result of information developed as part of inspections
conducted during the calendar year PLUS actions taken as a result of inspections
conducted during prior years and for which all required actions were not completed
Rev. 1/2011 Page 11 of 20

during the year of the inspection. Do not include actions which are anticipated based on
inspection results but which did not actually occur during the reporting year.
Report only those anomalies actually repaired, not those for which other mitigative
actions (not repair) were undertaken.
Section 6 - Total Mileage Inspected (all Methods) and Actions Taken.
These entries will be calculated automatically based on data entered in sections 1-5.
For operators completing a paper form as a result of PHMSA approval to use alternate
reporting measures (see above), report here the total mileage inspected and actions
taken as the sum of the indicated elements from other sections.
PART G – MILES OF BASELINE ASSESSMENTS AND REASSESSMENTS COMPLETED

IN CALENDAR YEAR (HCA Segment miles ONLY)
Report the number of miles of pipeline in HCA (as reported in part B) that were assessed during the
calendar year pursuant to §§ 192.921 or 192.937. Report separately the number of miles inspected for
baseline assessments (e.g., initial baseline assessments and new baseline assessments, including those
which occur due to new pipelines or facilities, new HCA, etc.) and miles for which a reassessment was
conducted. Do not include pipelines or portions of pipelines that could otherwise not affect an HCA
but which are included in an IM Program as a result of other PHMSA directives (such as Corrective
Action Orders, Compliance Orders, Special Permits, etc.).
Report only assessments that were completed during the calendar year. These “completed
assessments” are defined consistently with FAQ 34 http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/gasimp/faqlist.gim.
The date on which an assessment is considered complete will be the date on which final field
activities related to that assessment are performed, not including repair activities. That is when a
hydrostatic test is completed, when the last in-line inspection tool run of a scheduled series of tool runs
is performed, when the last direct examination associated with direct assessment is made, or the date
on which "other technology" for which an operator has provided timely notification is conducted.
Operators should report in Part G the total number of miles actually assessed. This differs from Part F
where operators report the number of miles inspected by individual inspection methods and where
some mileage may be reported multiple times. Operators should note that the mileages reported as
completed Assessments in Part G should be a subset of the total miles of onshore/offshore pipe in
HCA reported in Part B. Operators should validate the total completed and scheduled assessment
mileage in their Assessment Plans with the mileage reported here. The comparison of these two
Rev. 1/2011 Page 12 of 20

numbers will highlight any discrepancies resulting from new HCA segments being added or deleted,
acquired or sold, or idled 1 or converted, and which need to be properly reflected in this Report.
For the designated Commodity Group, complete PARTs H, I, J, K, L, and M covering

INTERstate pipelines and/or pipeline facilities for each State in which INTERstate systems exist
within this OPID and again covering INTRAstate pipelines and/or pipeline facilities separately
for each State in which INTRAstate systems exist within this OPID.
For example: Consider a set of natural gas pipeline systems that includes INTERstate pipeline
facilities in seven states and INTRAstate pipeline facilities in three states. Parts H, I, J, K, L, and
M should be completed ten times for this set of natural gas pipeline systems – seven times for
INTERstate assets (once for each state in which INTERstate assets are located) and once for the
INTRAstate assets in each of the three states in which INTRAstate assets are located.
Each time the remaining parts are completed, indicate whether the data reported is for
INTERstate or INTRAstate pipelines and/or pipeline facilities, and enter in the space provided
the two-letter postal abbreviation for the state.
PART H – MILES OF TRANSMISSION PIPE BY NOMINAL PIPE SIZE (NPS)
Report the miles of transmission pipe by Nominal Pipe Size (NPS) and location for both onshore and
offshore locations. Enter the appropriate mileage in the corresponding nominal size blocks.
Pipe size which does not correspond to NPS measurements should be included in the “Other Pipe Sizes
Not Listed” columns. Include both the pipe size and the corresponding mileage.
Enter zero (0) in any block for which the pipeline system includes no mileage. Do not leave any
blocks blank.
1
While the regulations do not recognize an intermediate state between operational and abandoned (see instructions for Part
A, Question 8 above), PHMSA has acknowledged that operators sometimes maintain some of their pipe in an idle status in
which conducting IM assessments is impractical. This consideration of “idle” pipe is discussed in FAQ 7 on the PHMSA
Gas IM website (http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/gasimp/faqlist.gim).
Rev. 1/2011 Page 13 of 20
PART I – MILES OF GATHERING PIPE BY NOMINAL PIPE SIZE (NPS)
Report the miles of gathering pipe by Nominal Pipe Size (NPS) and location for both Onshore and
Offshore locations. Report onshore Type A and Type B gathering lines (§ 192.8) separately, as shown.
Enter the appropriate mileage in the corresponding nominal size blocks.
Pipe size which does not correspond to NPS measurements should be included in the “Other Pipe Sizes
Not Listed” columns. Include both the pipe size and the corresponding mileage.
Enter zero (0) in any block for which the pipeline system includes no mileage. Do not leave any
blocks blank.
PART J – MILES OF PIPE BY DECADE INSTALLED
Report the miles of pipe by decade installed. Make an entry in each block including zero (0) when
appropriate. Some companies may have pipe for which installation records may not exist. When the
decade of construction is unknown, enter estimates of the totals of such mileage in the “Pre-40 or
Unknown” section of Part J.
PART K – MILES OF TRANSMISSION PIPE BY SPECIFIED MINIMUM YIELD

STRENGTH
Section 192.5 defines class locations as:

§ 192.5 Class locations.
(a) This section classifies pipeline locations for purposes of this part. The following criteria apply
to classifications under this section.
(1) A ''class location unit'' is an onshore area that extends 220 yards (200 meters) on
either side of the centerline of any continuous 1-mile (1.6 kilometers) length of pipeline.
(2) Each separate dwelling unit in a multiple dwelling unit building is counted as a
separate building intended for human occupancy.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, pipeline locations are classified as follows:
(i) An offshore area; or
Rev. 1/2011 Page 14 of 20

(ii) Any class location unit that has 10 or fewer buildings intended for human
occupancy.
(2) A Class 2 location is any class location unit that has more than 10 but fewer than 46
buildings intended for human occupancy.
(i) Any class location unit that has 46 or more buildings intended for human
occupancy; or
(ii) An area where the pipeline lies within 100 yards (91 meters) of either a
building or a small, well-defined outside area (such as a playground, recreation
area, outdoor theater, or other place of public assembly) that is occupied by 20 or
more persons on at least 5 days a week for 10 weeks in any 12-month period. (The
days and weeks need not be consecutive.)
(4) A Class 4 location is any class location unit where buildings with four or more stories
above ground are prevalent.
(c) The length of Class locations 2, 3, and 4 may be adjusted as follows:
(1) A Class 4 location ends 220 yards (200 meters) from the nearest building with four or
more stories above ground.
(2) When a cluster of buildings intended for human occupancy requires a Class 2 or 3
location, the class location ends 220 yards (200 meters) from the nearest building in the
cluster.
Report the total miles of steel transmission pipe by hoop stress (as percent of SMYS) for pipe onshore
and offshore by stress range and Class Location. Enter zero (0) in any cell for which the pipeline
system includes no mileage. Report pipe for which hoop stress (i.e., percent of SMYS) is unknown
and all non-steel pipe, regardless of operating pressure, in the rows indicated. Do not leave any cells
blank.
Pay close attention to the classification of each pipeline. Short segments of pipeline operated by
distribution systems at less than or equal to 20 percent SMYS have sometimes been inaccurately
reported as transmission lines. Unless such pipelines meet the definition of transmission lines in §
192.3, they should be reported as distribution pipelines (Form PHMSA F 7100.1-1). If pipelines
operating at less than or equal to 20 percent SMYS meet the definition of transmission lines, they
should be reported here.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 15 of 20

PART L – MILES OF PIPE BY CLASS LOCATION
Report the number of Onshore and Offshore miles of pipe in each Class Location. In addition, report
the number of HCA miles in the IMP program for both Onshore and Offshore transmission pipe.
Note: Operators should cross check their numbers for the various Parts, when applicable.
PART M – INCIDENTS, FAILURES, LEAKS, AND REPAIRS
This Part includes reporting for both pipelines and/or pipeline facilities covered by this OPID which
are subject to the integrity management (IM) requirements of 49 CFR 192, Subpart O as well as
pipelines and/or pipeline facilities covered by this OPID which are not subject to the integrity
management (IM) requirements of 49 CFR 192, Subpart O. Additional instructions are provided
below.
PART M1 – ALL LEAKS ELIMINATED/REPAIRED IN CALENDAR YEAR; INCIDENTS &

FAILURES IN HCA IN CALENDAR YEAR
This Part incorporates transmission pipeline integrity management performance measure reporting
required by § 192.945 and ASME/ANSI B31.8S, Section 9.4(b)(4) (incorporated into the regulations
by reference), along with reporting of all leaks that has historically been part of the Annual Report.
Include all leaks repaired or eliminated including by replaced pipe or other component during the
calendar year. Operators with pipe segments in HCA and subject to IM requirements (as reported in
Part A, Question 5) should report separately the number of leaks repaired or eliminated in HCA in the
appropriate columns. All operators should report leaks for non-HCA pipe segments, including all
leaks on pipelines that contain no HCAs and all leaks in non-HCA locations on pipelines in which
HCAs exist. Do not include test failures.
Operators with pipe segments in HCA (as reported in Part A, Question 5) should also report the
number of failures and incidents in HCAs, as required by § 195.945 and ASME/ANSI B31.8S, Section
9.4(b)(4).
Integrity management performance measures are not required for gathering pipelines. For gathering
pipelines, report only leaks. Report separately the number of leaks in Type A gathering lines and Type
B gathering lines for onshore gathering pipelines.
Leaks are unintentional escapes of gas from the pipeline that are not reportable as Incidents
under § 191.3. A non-hazardous release that can be eliminated by lubrication, adjustment, or
tightening is not a leak. Operators should report the number of leaks repaired based on the best data
Rev. 1/2011 Page 16 of 20

they have available. For sections replaced but retired in place, operators should consider leak survey
information to determine, to the extent practical, the number of leaks in the replaced section.
Failure is defined in ASME/ANSI B31.8S as a general term used to imply that a part in service: has
become completely inoperable, is still operable but is incapable of satisfactorily performing its
intended function; or has deteriorated seriously, to the point that it has become unreliable or unsafe for
continued use. Failures that result in an unintentional release of gas should be reported as leaks.
Incidents are defined in § 191.3.
For the purposes of this Part M1, Leaks, Failures, and Incidents are to be classified as either:
EXTERNAL CORROSION: release resulting from a hole in the pipe or other component that
galvanic, bacterial, chemical, stray current, or other corrosive action causes initiating on the outside
surface of the pipe. For PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, this includes
the “External Corrosion” sub-cause under G1 – Corrosion Failure.
INTERNAL CORROSION: release resulting from a hole in the pipe or other component that
galvanic, bacterial, chemical, stray current, or other corrosive action causes initiating on the inside
surface of the pipe. From PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, and
specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this includes the “Internal Corrosion” sub-cause under G1
– Corrosion Failure.
STRESS CORROSION CRACKING: release resulting from a form of environmental attack of the
pipe metal involving an interaction of a local corrosive environment and tensile stresses in the metal
resulting in formation and growth of cracks. From PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident
Reporting form, and specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this includes the “Environmental
Cracking-related” sub-cause under G5 – Material Failure of Pipe or Weld, which includes Stress
Corrosion Cracking as well as Sulfide Stress Cracking and Hydrogen Stress Cracking.
MANUFACTURING: release resulting from a hole in the pipe or other component caused by a
defect introduced during the process of manufacturing the pipe, including seam defects and defects in
the pipe body or pipe girth weld. From PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting
form, and specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this includes the “Original Manufacturing
Defect-related” sub-cause under G5 – Material Failure of Pipe or Weld.
CONSTRUCTION: release resulting from a hole in the pipe or other component caused by a defect
introduced during the process of constructing the pipeline or installing the pipe. From PHMSA’s Gas
Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, and specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this
includes the “Construction-, Installation-, or Fabrication-related” sub-cause under G5 – Material
Failure of Pipe or Weld.
EQUIPMENT: release resulting from: malfunction of control/relief equipment including valves,

regulators, or other instrumentation; stripped threads or broken pipe couplings on nipples, valves, or
Rev. 1/2011 Page 17 of 20
mechanical couplings; or seal failures of gaskets, O-rings, seal/pump packing, or similar leaks. From
PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, and specifically for the purposes of
this Part M1, this includes all of the sub-causes under G6 – Equipment Failure.
INCORRECT OPERATIONS: release resulting from inadequate procedures or safety practices, or

failure to follow correct procedures, or other operator error. From PHMSA’s Gas
Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, and specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this
includes all of the sub-causes under G7 – Incorrect Operation.
THIRD PARTY DAMAGE/MECHANICAL DAMAGE: release resulting from damage caused by

earth moving or other equipment, tools, or vehicles which occurs as a result of excavation activities or
a release caused by vandalism or other similar intentional damage. Report separately, as indicated:
• Excavation Damage - leaks resulting directly from excavation damage by operator's

personnel (oftentimes referred to as “first party” excavation damage) or by the
operator’s contractor (oftentimes referred to as “second party” excavation damage) or
by people or contractors not associated with the operator (oftentimes referred to as
“third party” excavation damage) From PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering
Incident Reporting form, and specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this includes
the Excavation Damage by Operator (First Party), Excavation Damage by Operator’s
Contractor (Second Party), and Excavation Damage by Third Party sub-causes under
G3 – Excavation Damage;
• Previous Damage (due to Excavation Activity) - leaks that are determined to have
resulted from previous damage due to excavation activity From PHMSA’s Gas
Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, and specifically for the purposes of
this Part M1, this includes only the Previous Damage due to Excavation Activity sub-
cause under G3 – Excavation Damage; and,
• Vandalism (includes all Intentional Damage) - deliberate or willful acts, such as

vandalism. From PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, and
specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this includes only the “Intentional
Damage” sub-cause under G4 – Other Outside Force Damage. (For proper treatment of
the other sub-causes under G4 – Other Outside Force Damage, see the next category.)
WEATHER RELATED/OTHER OUTSIDE FORCE DAMAGE: release resulting from earth

movement, earthquakes, landslides, subsidence, lightning, heavy rains/floods, washouts, flotation,
mudslide, scouring, temperature, frost heave, frozen components, high winds, or similar natural causes,
or a release from other, non-excavation-related outside forces, such as nearby fires or explosions;
contact with vehicles, boats, fishing or maritime vessels or equipment; and, electrical arcing. Report
separately, as indicated:
• Natural Force Damage (all) - From PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident
Rev. 1/2011 Page 18 of 20

Reporting form, and specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this includes all of the
sub-causes under G2 – Natural Force Damage
• Other Outside Force Damage (excluding Vandalism and all Intentional Damage) -
From PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, and specifically
for the purposes of this Part M1, this includes all of the sub-causes under G4 – Other
Outside Force Damage except Intentional Damage.
OTHER: release resulting from any other cause, such as exceeding the service life, not attributable to
the above causes. From PHMSA’s Gas Transmission/Gathering Incident Reporting form, and
specifically for the purposes of this Part M1, this includes both of the two sub-causes under G8 – Other
Incident Cause.
PART M2 –KNOWN SYSTEM LEAKS AT END OF YEAR SCHEDULED FOR REPAIR
Include all known leaks scheduled for elimination by repairing or by replacing pipe or some other
component, indicating separately for transmission lines and gathering lines.
Enter zero (0) in any cell for which the pipeline system includes no mileage or there are no known
leaks scheduled for repair. Do not leave any cells blank.
PART M3 –LEAKS ON FEDERAL LAND OR OCS REPAIRED OR SCHEDULED FOR

REPAIR
FEDERAL LANDS means all lands owned by the United States except lands in the National Park
System, lands held in trust for an Indian or Indian tribe, and lands on the Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS), as defined in 30 USC 185.
Enter all leaks repaired, eliminated, or scheduled for repair during the reporting year, excluding those
reported as incidents on Form PHMSA F 7100.2.
Enter zero (0) in any cell for which the pipeline system includes no mileage or there are no known
leaks scheduled for repair. Do not leave any cells blank.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 19 of 20

For the designated Commodity Group, complete Part N one time for all of the pipelines and/or
pipeline facilities included within this OPID. Complete Part O one time for all the pipelines
and/or pipeline facilities covered under this Commodity Group and OPID if any portion(s) of the
pipelines and/or pipeline facilities are included in an IM Program subject to Subpart O as
indicated in Part A, Question 6.
PART N – PREPARER SIGNATURE
The Preparer is the person who compiled the information and prepared the responses to the Report.
Enter the Preparer’s name and title, and e-mail address if the Preparer has one, and the phone and fax
numbers used by the Preparer.
PART O – CERTIFYING SIGNATURE
CERTIFYING SIGNATURE must be a senior executive officer of the operator. The Pipeline
Inspection, Protection, Enforcement and Safety Act (signed in December 2006) requires pipeline
operators to have a senior executive officer of the company sign and certify annual pipeline Integrity
Management Program (IMP) performance reports (Parts B, F, G, and M1 – HCA data only - of this
Report). By this signature, the senior executive officer is certifying that he or she has (1) reviewed the
Report and (2) to the best of his or her knowledge, believes the Report is true and complete.
Senior Executive Officer is the person who is certifying the information on Parts B, F, G, and M1 as
required by 49 U.S.C. 60109(f).
The name and title of the senior executive officer certifying the Report should be entered in the
appropriate blanks on this section of the Report. The name of the senior executive officer certifying
the Report should also be entered in the signature block on the Report. Operators should keep in mind
that entering the senior executive officer’s name onto the electronic Report is equivalent to a paper
submission and has the same legal authenticity and requirements.
Rev. 1/2011 Page 20 of 20

11/7/2011
The Final Rule
Amendment 192‐113
74 FR 63905, December 4, 2009
DIMP Purpose
“The purpose of these programs is to enhance safety by
identifying and reducing pipeline integrity risks.”
Amends 192.383 for EFV’s
Adds new Subpart P
Meets statutory requirements in the PIPES Act of 2006
1
11/7/2011
Distribution Systems
2 million miles of distribution piping
Over 1.2 million miles of mains
63 million services, estimated to be 800,000 miles
Incidents on distribution systems tend to cause
more fatalities and injuries than those on
transmission systems
However, rates are similar
Since 2006 fatality/injury rate on distribution has
started to rise.
Basic premise – “safety is improved by
identifying risks and taking actions to address
them”
Transmission and distribution systems have
significantly different operating conditions
IM regulations for transmission will not work
for distribution
Different regulations are needed for
distribution.
2
11/7/2011
Transmission vs. Distribution
Transmission lines go long distances, often in rural
areas.
Distribution lines are shorter and in populated areas.
Transmission HCA’s focus resources where
consequence would be the highest.
HCA’s on distribution would include almost the entire
system.
Distribution systems are complex networks.
Small diameter.
Grid‐like system, with extensive branching.
Not suitable for inline inspection tools.
Transmission systems –
Generally point to point with few or widely spaced
branch connections.
Large diameter.
Inline inspection tools can be used.
3
11/7/2011
Pressure testing
More easily accomplished on transmission.
Distribution has many connections and may cause long
service interruptions.
Direct Assessment
Distribution has considerable non‐metallic pipe.
Transmission lines are primarily steel, with few
interfering connections.
The Final Rule
Amendment 192‐113.
Published in Federal Register Dec. 4, 2009.
Effective date is February 2, 2010.
Includes changes to EFV regulations, 192.383.
Adds Subpart P to Part 192.
4
11/7/2011
Mandatory Items
Install Excess Flow Valves on new and replaced
services to single residences
Report mechanical fitting (compression coupling) failures
in Mechanical Fitting Failure Report (annual reports) to
PHMSA
Have a procedure to manage LEAKS
Phase 1: 7 Elements of a DIMP
Plan
1. Develop a written integrity management plan
2. Know your infrastructure
3. Identify threats (existing and potential)
4. Assess and prioritize risk
5. Identify and implement measures to reduce risks
6. Measure and monitor performance, and
7. Report results
5
11/7/2011
3. Identify Threats
A “threat” is Corrosion
something that can Material or Welds
lead to a failure Natural Forces
Equipment
(unplanned release
Excavation
of gas)
Incorrect Operations
Phase 1 identified 8 Other Outside Force
threats: Damage
Other
7. Report Results
External Performance Measures
To allow states and PHMSA to determine if DIMP is
working
Number of hazardous leaks either eliminated or repaired,
per Sec. 192.703(c), categorized by cause;
Number of excavation damages;
Number of excavation tickets (receipt of information by
the underground facility operator from the notification
center);
Number of EFVs installed – not used to measure
performance;
Reporting via Annual Reports.
Mechanical Fitting Failure Report.
6
11/7/2011
Internal Performance Measures
To allow the operator to determine if its DIM
Program is working
Total number of leaks either eliminated or repaired,
categorized by cause;
Number of hazardous leaks either eliminated or repaired
per Sec. 192.703(c), categorized by material; and
Any additional measures to evaluate the effectiveness of
the operator's program in controlling each identified
threat.
No reporting, but must be available for audit during
state inspections
IM Code Sections
192.1001 What definitions apply to this subpart?
192.1003 What do the regulations in this subpart cover?
192.1005 What must a gas distribution operator (other
than a master meter or small LPG operator) do to
implement this subpart?
192.1007 What are the required elements of an
integrity management plan?
7
11/7/2011
IM Code Sections
192.1009 What must an operator report when when a
mechanical fitting fails?
192.1011 What records must an operator keep?
192.1013 When may an operator deviate from required
periodic inspections of this part?
192.1015 What must a master meter or small liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG) operator do to implement this
subpart?
Compliance Dates
Excess Flow Valves.
Effective Feb. 12, 2010 EFVs must installed according to
192.383.
Report mechanical fitting failures according to 191.12
starting with report due on March 15, 2012 (for calendar
year 2011).
Develop and implement a written DIM plan by August 2,
2011.
8
11/7/2011
§ 192.1001 What definitions apply to this
subpart?
Excavation Damage means any impact that results in
the need to repair or replace an underground facility
due to a weakening, or the partial or complete
destruction, of the facility, including, but not limited
to, the protective coating, lateral support, cathodic
protection or the housing for the line device or facility.
subpart?
Hazardous Leak means a leak that represents an
existing or probable hazard to persons or property
and requires immediate repair or continuous
action until the conditions are no longer
hazardous.
Integrity Management Plan or IM Plan means a
written explanation of the mechanisms or
procedures the operator will use to implement its
integrity management program and to ensure
compliance with this subpart.
9
11/7/2011
subpart?
Integrity Management Program or IM Program
means an overall approach by an operator to
ensure the integrity of its gas distribution system.
Mechanical fitting means a mechanical device
used to connect sections of pipe. The term
"Mechanical fitting" applies only to:
(1) Stab Type fittings;
(2) Nut Follower Type fittings;
(3) Bolted Type fittings; or
(4) Other Compression Type fittings
subpart?
Small LPG Operator means an operator of a
liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) distribution
pipeline that serves fewer than 100 customers from
a single source.
10
11/7/2011
§ 192.1003 What do the regulations in this
subpart cover?
General. This subpart prescribes minimum
requirements for an IM program for any gas
distribution pipeline covered under this part,
including liquefied petroleum gas systems. A gas
distribution operator, other than a master meter
operator or a small LPG operator, must follow the
requirements in § § 192.1005‐192.1013 of this
subpart. A master meter operator or small LPG
operator of a gas distribution pipeline must follow
the requirements in § 192.1015 of this subpart.
§ 192.1005
§ 192.1005 What must a gas distribution
operator (other than a master meter or small
LPG operator) do to implement this subpart?
No later than August 2, 2011 a gas distribution
operator must develop and implement an integrity
management program that includes a written
integrity management plan as specified in §
192.1007.
11
11/7/2011
§ 192.1007 What are the required elements of an
A written integrity management plan must contain
procedures for developing and implementing the
following elements:
(a) Knowledge.
(b) Identify threats.
(b) Identify threats.
Corrosion,
natural forces,
excavation damage,
other outside force damage,
material or welds,
equipment failure,
incorrect operations, and
other concerns
12
11/7/2011
(c) Evaluate and rank risk.
(d) Identify and implement measures to address risks.
Including an effective leak management program.
Effective Leak Management
LEAKS
Locate the leak;
Evaluate its severity;
Act appropriately to mitigate the leak;
Keep records; and
Self‐assess to determine if additional actions are
necessary to keep the system safe.
13
11/7/2011
§ 192.1007 Elements (cont.)
(e) Measure performance, monitor results, and
evaluate effectiveness.
(f) Periodic Evaluation and Improvement.
(g) Report results.
§192.1009 What must an operator report when a
mechanical fitting fails?
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, each operator
of a distribution pipeline system must submit a report on each
mechanical fitting failure, excluding any failure that results only in a
nonhazardous leak, on a Department of Transportation Form PHMSA
F‐ 7100.1‐2. The report(s) must be submitted in accordance with §
191.12.
(b) The mechanical fitting failure reporting requirements in paragraph
(a) of this section do not apply to the following:
(1) Master meter operators;
(2) Small LPG operator as defined in § 192.1001; or
(3) LNG facilities.
14
11/7/2011
§191.12 Distribution Systems.
Mechanical Fitting Failure Reports
Each mechanical fitting failure, as required by §
192.1009, must be submitted on a Mechanical Fitting
Failure Report Form PHMSA F‐ 7100.1‐2.
An operator must submit a mechanical fitting failure
report for each mechanical fitting failure that occurs
within a calendar year not later than March 15 of the
following year.
An operator may submit reports throughout the year.
§ 192.1011 What records must an operator
keep?
An operator must maintain records demonstrating
compliance with the requirements of this subpart for
at least 10 years. The records must include copies of
superseded integrity management plans developed
under this subpart.
15
11/7/2011
§ 192.1013 When may an operator deviate from
required periodic inspections under this part?
(a) An operator may propose to reduce the frequency
of periodic inspections and tests required in this part
on the basis of the engineering analysis and risk
assessment required by this subpart.
(b) An operator must submit its proposal to the
PHMSA Associate Administrator for Pipeline
Safety or, in the case of an intrastate pipeline
facility regulated by the State, the appropriate
State agency. The applicable oversight agency may
accept the proposal on its own authority, with or
without conditions and limitations, on a showing
that the operator's proposal, which includes the
adjusted interval, will provide an equal or greater
overall level of safety.
16
11/7/2011
(c) An operator may implement an approved
reduction in the frequency of a periodic inspection or
test only where the operator has developed and
implemented an integrity management program that
provides an equal or improved overall level of safety
despite the reduced frequency of periodic inspections.
§ 192.1015
§ 192.1015 What must a master meter or small
liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) operator do to
implement this subpart?
Much the same as for other operators but no reporting
requirements except for telephonic notice of incidents.
Other documentation is also reduced.
17
11/3/2011
Enforcement Process
Compliance, Federal
& State Waivers and
Interpretations
David E. Bull, ARM

ViaData LP
debull@viadata.com
Regulatory Compliance
What did the operator do (or not do)
that is required by the regulations?
Record keeping is the main
component to prove compliance
OPS/state personnel will verify
compliance with field inspections
1
11/3/2011
Enforcement Process
§190.203 Inspections
Letters of concern (non-enforceable)
§190.205 Warning letters
§190.207 Notice of probable
violation
§190.209 Response options
§190.211 Hearing
§190.213 Final order
Guideline to Recordkeeping
Records required by
§ 192.603(b) Each operator shall keep
records necessary to administer the
procedures established under
§192.605.
§ 195.404
Numerous references in 192 and
195 to additional records
2
11/3/2011
Record Types
Must keep written or electronic
records
Able to prove compliance
Show corrective action
Verify tests and work done
Maps of system
Plans, The Big Picture

O&M Plans
Emergency Plans
OQ Plan
Integrity management plan
Public safety awareness plan
3
11/3/2011
Records Needed
Material information
Design parameters
Welding and joining
Construction specifications
Construction inspection
Testing of mains and services
Still More Records

Meter and regulator location
Main and service locations
Corrosion control procedures
Records of cathodic protection
system
Testing of cathodic protection
Rectifier inspections
4
11/3/2011
And More Records

Odorization testing
Leak surveys
Valve inspections
Integrity management
Public safety and education
OPS Checklists
Checklists and OPS
Actions
5
11/3/2011
OPS Inspections
Drug and alcohol
Compliance
Construction
Breakout tanks
Pipeline failure
Storage field
OPS Inspections
Breakout Tank Inspection Form
Collection Site Procedures Inspection Form - Alcohol
Collection Site Procedures Inspection Form - Drugs
Drug and Alcohol - Self Assessment Form
Field Inspection - Alcohol Abuse
Field Inspection - Anti Drug
Evaluation Report of Gas Pipeline Construction
Standard Inspection Report of Gas Distribution Pipeline
Standard Inspection Report of Gas Transmission Pipeline
Gas Compressor Station Construction Report
Gas Storage Field Review
6
11/3/2011
OPS Inspections
Standard Inspection Report of Gas Transmission
Pipeline
Gas Compressor Station Construction Report
Gas Storage Field Review
Operator Qualification Protocols
Integrity Management Protocols
Standard Inspection Report of a Liquid Pipeline
Carrier
Evaluation Report of Liquid Pipeline Construction
Standard Inspection Form for an LNG Facility
Pipeline Failure Investigation Report
Waiver Request
Operators may request waivers for
regulations in Parts 191, 192, 193, 195
and 199
Submitted to appropriate federal or state
agency
States granting waivers must give OPS
written notice of waiver
OPS has 60 days to object and
disapprove
State may request a hearing, OPS makes
final determination
7
11/3/2011
Waiver, 195.260(e)
Sept. 2, 1997
Dear Mr. Rockwell:
This is in response to your petition of September 2, 1997, requesting a consideration of

waiver from 49 CFR 195.260(e) for certain mainline block valves located on each side of
water crossings along the proposed Yellowstone Pipeline (YPL). The pipeline safety
regulations in 49 CFR 195.260(e) require a valve on each side of a water crossing that is
more than 100 feet wide from high-water mark to high-water mark unless the
Administrator finds in a particular case that valves are not justified. The authority to
find for alternate valve placement has been delegated to the Associate Administrator for
Pipeline Safety.
…
I find that the alternate valve spacing for the river crossing valves proposed in
Yellowstone Pipeline’s September 2, 1997 petition will provide a level of safety equivalent
to the valve spacing requirement contained in 49 CFR 195.260(e). Therefore, your
petition is approved. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact
me or L.E. Herrick at telephone number (202)366 5523 or E-mail le.herrick
@rspa.dot.gov.
Sincerely,
Richard B Felder
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety
Waiver 195.306
August 16, 1995
Ms. Mary L. McDaniel, P.E.
Manager, Pipeline Safety
Railroad Commission of Texas
Transportation/Gas Utilities Division
PO Box 12967
Austin, Texas 78711-2967
Dear Ms. McDaniel:
Your letter of June 30, 1995, and its supporting documents describe the Commission's approval of an application
by Mobil Exploration & Producing U.S. Inc., for wavier of 49 CFR § 195.306(c)(5).
…
In this instance, it is reasonable and economical to use carbon dioxide as the test medium. Additionally, the
information in your application states that the lines are buried and that there are no houses or businesses within
600 feet of the pipelines. Therefore, we believe that the use of carbon dioxide as the test medium is not
inconsistent with the pipeline safety regulations. For this reason, we do not object to the wavier as granted.
Sincerely,
Richard B. Felder
Associate Administrator
for Pipeline Safety
8
11/3/2011
Waiver 195.306
August 16, 1995
In this instance, it is reasonable and economical

to use carbon dioxide as the test medium.
Additionally, the information in your application
states that the lines are buried and that there are
no houses or businesses within 600 feet of the
pipelines. Therefore, we believe that the use of
carbon dioxide as the test medium is not
inconsistent with the pipeline safety regulations.
For this reason, we do not object to the wavier as
granted.
Waiver, 192.121
November 29, 2002
Mr. Glynn Blanton
Chief, Gas Pipeline Safety Division
Tennessee Regulatory Authority
460 James Robertson Parkway
Nashville, TN 37243-0505
Dear Mr. Blanton:

On June 18, 2002, the Tennessee Regulatory Authority (TRA) notified the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) that it
had approved, as amended, the application of the Nashville Gas Company (NGC), a Division of Piedmont Natural Gas
Company, Inc., for a waiver from the requirements of Title 49 CFR §§ 192.121 and 192.123(a).
In a letter dated August 14, 2002, OPS objected to the waiver and under 49 U.S.C. 60118(d), TRA’s action granting the NGC
waiver was stayed. In that letter, OPS indicated that it would reconsider the objection if TRA provided additional information.
... (additional information is listed)
The results of the tests will be filed with TRA and made available to OPS upon request.
Based on the above representations, we are withdrawing our objection and the waiver may take effect as
planned.
Sincerely,
Stacey L. Gerard
Associate Administrator
For Pipeline Safety
9
11/3/2011
Waiver, 192.121
November 29, 2002
In a letter dated August 14, 2002, OPS objected to the waiver

and under 49 U.S.C. 60118(d), TRA’s action granting the
NGC waiver was stayed. In that letter, OPS indicated that it
would reconsider the objection if TRA provided additional
information.
... (additional information is listed)
The results of the tests will be filed with TRA and made
available to OPS upon request.
Based on the above representations, we are
withdrawing our objection and the waiver may take effect as
planned.
Interpretation Request
§190.11 Availability of informal
guidance and interpretive assistance
Interpretations apply only to the
specific issue and company making the
request
Interpretations can be used for general
guidance for similar situations
10
11/3/2011
Interpretation 192.603, May 9, 1991

Mr. Albert T. Richardson
Tenneco Gas
1010 Milam Street
Houston, TX 77252-2511
(ViaData Note – Ref: 192.1 and 192.603)
Dear Mr. Richardson:

This responds to your letter of February 25, 1991, to William Gute. The letter discusses Tenneco's use of
computers instead of paper to record and store information it must maintain under 49 CFR Parts 191 and 192.
You asked us to determine standards that would be acceptable in maintaining this information in computers.
Under Parts 191 and 192, operators may use any recordkeeping procedure that produces authentic records,
without the prior approval of this agency. The proposed standards enclosed with your letter, which are aimed at
ensuring the authenticity of computerized records, are permissible under Parts 191 and 192.
Although authenticity of records concerns us, for both computer and paper records, we do not believe there is
sufficient need to adopt generally applicable standards governing recordkeeping procedures. In the absence of
such standards, we ordinarily do not review an operator's recordkeeping procedures unless the legitimacy of
records is in question. Accordingly, we have no comments at this time on the adequacy of your proposed
standards.
Sincerely,
George W. Tenley, Jr.
Associate Administrator for
Pipeline Safety
cc:
DPS:11, 10, 20, 2, 1
DPS-11:LMFurrow: lfv: 366-2392:5/9/91
Interpretation 192.603, May 9, 1991
Under Parts 191 and 192, operators may use any recordkeeping
procedure that produces authentic records, without the prior
approval of this agency. The proposed standards enclosed with
your letter, which are aimed at ensuring the authenticity of
computerized records, are permissible under Parts 191 and 192.
Although authenticity of records concerns us, for both computer
and paper records, we do not believe there is sufficient need to
adopt generally applicable standards governing recordkeeping
procedures. In the absence of such standards, we ordinarily do
not review an operator's recordkeeping procedures unless the
legitimacy of records is in question. Accordingly, we have no
comments at this time on the adequacy of your proposed
standards.
11
11/3/2011
WARNING LETTER
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
November 27, 1996
Mr. Keith Casenhiser

(deleted)
CPF No. 56014-W
Dear Mr. Casenhiser:

On November 11, 1996, the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) received a telephonic incident report from the National Response Center
(NRC) for an incident involving your pipeline facilities located at 8536 Kern Canyon Road in Bakersfield, California.
As a result of our review of the telephonic incident report, it appears that you have committed a probable violation, as noted below, of
the pipeline safety regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 191. The probable violation is:
…(deleted)
An incident occurred, at approximately 5:30 P.M. EST on November 10, 1996, on your pipeline system meeting the reporting
requirements of §191.5 of the pipeline safety regulations. The incident was not reported to the NRC until approximately 12:30 P.M.
EST on November 11, 1996. This is approximately 17 hours over the two (2) hour time limit OPS considers as practicable for giving
notice to the NRC for a reportable incident as defined by §191.3.
Under 49 United States Code §60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $25,000 for each violation for each day the
violation persists up to a maximum of $500,000 for any related series of violations.
We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documents involved in this case, and have decided not to assess you a civil
penalty. We advise you, however, that should you not correct the circumstances leading to the violations, we will take enforcement
action when and if the continued violations come to our attention.
You will not hear from us again with regard to this issue. Because of the good faith that you have exhibited up to this time, we expect
that you will act to bring your pipeline and operations into compliance with the pipeline safety regulations.
Sincerely,
Edward J. Ondak
Director
WARNING LETTER
November 27, 1996
We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting

documents involved in this case, and have decided not to
assess you a civil penalty. We advise you, however, that
should you not correct the circumstances leading to the
violations, we will take enforcement action when and if the
continued violations come to our attention.
12
11/3/2011
NOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION

PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER
March 10, 1998
Mr. Rudy Wadlington

(deleted)
CPF No. 28100
Dear Mr. Wadlington:

On February 2-4, 1998, a representative of the Southern Region, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49
United States Code, conducted an inspection of your facilities and the records in Hope, Arkansas.
As a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed probable violations as noted below of pipeline safety regulations,
Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 192. The items inspected and the probable violations are:
...(deleted)
In consideration of the foregoing, pursuant to 49 United States Code §60118, the Office of Pipeline Safety proposes to issue to
Louisiana-Nevada Transit Co. a compliance order in the form of the proposed compliance order that is attached to and made a part
of this Notice of Probable Violation.
We have reviewed the circumstances and supporting documentation involved in this case and have decided not to assess a civil
penalty. We advise you, however, that we consider these items as very serious and they need to be corrected with all possible haste.
Also attached, is a description of the available procedures for responding to this Notice. Please note that if you elect to make a
response, you must do so within 30 days of receipt of this Notice or waive your rights under 49 C.F.R.§190.209. No response or a
response that does not contest the allegation in the Notice authorizes the Associate Administrator, OPS, to find the facts to be as
alleged herein and to issue appropriate orders.
The 30-day response period may be extended for good cause shown and submitted within the original 30 days.
Sincerely,
Frederick A. Joyner
Director, Southern Region
NOTICE OF PROBABLE VIOLATION

PROPOSED COMPLIANCE ORDER
As a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed

probable violations as noted below of pipeline safety regulations, Title
49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 192. The items inspected and the
probable violations are:
...(deleted)
In consideration of the foregoing, pursuant to 49 United States Code
§60118, the Office of Pipeline Safety proposes to issue to Louisiana-
Nevada Transit Co. a compliance order in the form of the proposed
compliance order that is attached to and made a part of this Notice of
Probable Violation.
13
11/3/2011
FINAL ORDER – CIVIL PENALTY
Mr. Rick J. Schach

Vice President of Vectren Utilities Holding
Norman P. Wagner Complex
1 North Main Street
Evansville, IN 47709
RE: CPF No. 2-2001-1017M
Dear Mr. Schach:
Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety in the above-referenced case. It makes
findings of violation, assesses a civil penalty of $15,000, and requires certain corrective action. The penalty payment terms
are set forth in the Final Order. When the civil penalty is paid and the terms of the compliance order completed, as
determined by the Director, Southern Region, this enforcement action will be closed. Your receipt of the Final Order
constitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
Sincerely,
Gwendolyn M. Hill
Pipeline Compliance Registry
(final order deleted)
Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, respondent has a right to petition for reconsideration of this Final Order. However, if the civil
penalty is paid, the case closes automatically and Respondent waives the right to petition for reconsideration. The filing of
the petition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty assessed. The petition must be received within 20 days of
Respondent’s receipt of this Final Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). The terms and conditions of this
Final Order are effective on receipt.
Stacey Gerard
Date Issued
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety
FINAL ORDER – CIVIL PENALTY
Enclosed is the Final Order issued by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline
Safety in the above-referenced case. It makes findings of violation, assesses a civil
penalty of $15,000, and requires certain corrective action. The penalty payment
terms are set forth in the Final Order. When the civil penalty is paid and the
terms of the compliance order completed, as determined by the Director, Southern
Region, this enforcement action will be closed. Your receipt of the Final Order
constitutes service of that document under 49 C.F.R. § 190.5.
…
(final order deleted)
Under 49 C.F.R. § 190.215, respondent has a right to petition for reconsideration
of this Final Order. However, if the civil penalty is paid, the case closes
automatically and Respondent waives the right to petition for reconsideration.
The filing of the petition automatically stays the payment of any civil penalty
assessed. The petition must be received within 20 days of Respondent’s receipt of
this Final Order and must contain a brief statement of the issue(s). The terms and
conditions of this Final Order are effective on receipt.
14
11/3/2011
Common Areas of “Non-

Compliance”
192.13, General
Failure to follow plans.
Subpart I, Corrosion
Monitoring, low readings, failure to
correct low reads, inadequate
procedures.
192.603 Operations, General
Failure to keep records or prepare O&M
manual.

Compliance”
192.605, O&M Plans
Failure to establish procedures,
inadequate procedures.
192.615, Emergency Plans
Failure to have plan, inadequate plan,
inadequate training or liaison.
192.619 MAOP
Incorrect calculation, exceed MAOP,
records
15
11/3/2011

Compliance”
192.703
Failure to operate in accordance with the
section.
192.707 Line Markers
Inadequate or no markers, incorrect phone
number, incorrect address, lettering.
192.739 Inspection of regulators
No tests or records of tests, exceed testing
time period

Compliance”
192.743 Testing of Reliefs
No tests or records of tests, inadequate
capacity, exceed testing period.
192. 745 and .747 Valve
Maintenance
No tests or records of tests, exceed
testing period, failure to take corrective
action.
16
11/3/2011
Part 192 Gas

600+ Total non-compliance letters, final orders
Subpart A, General 30
SubPart D, Design of Pipeline Components 20
SubPart E, Welding of Steel in Pipelines 26
SubPart F, Joining of Materials Other Than by
Welding 9
Part 192 Gas

SubPart I Requirements for Corrosion
Control 150
.453 General. 12
.463 External corrosion control: Cathodic protection.
14
.465 External corrosion control: Monitoring. 53
.467 External corrosion control: Electrical isolation. 10
.481 Atmospheric corrosion control: Monitoring. 11
.491 Corrosion control records. 11
17
11/3/2011
Part 192 Gas

SubPart L Operations 183
.603 General provisions. 34
.605 Procedural manual for operations,
maintenance, and emergencies 68
.613 Continuing Surveillance. 13
.615 Emergency plans. 36
Part 192 Gas

SubPart M Maintenance 158
.705 Transmission lines: Patrolling. 17
.707 Line markers for mains and transmission lines. 18
.731 Compressor stations: Inspection and testing of
relief devices. 14
.739 Pressure limiting and regulating stations:
Inspection and testing. 23
.743 Pressure limiting and regulating stations:
Capacity of relief devices. 13
.745 Valve maintenance: Transmission lines. 15
18
11/3/2011
Part 195 Liquids

Subpart A General 1
Subpart B Annual, Accident, and Safety-
Related Condition Reporting 18
Subpart C Design Requirements 7
Subpart D Construction 64
Subpart E Pressure Testing 17
Subpart F Operation and Maintenance 487
Subpart G Operator Qualification 1
Subpart H Corrosion Control
Part 195 Liquids

Subpart F Operation and Maintenance 487
.401 General requirements. 27
.402 Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and
emergencies. 108
.403 Training. 20
.404 Maps and Records. 33
.406 Maximum operating pressure. 22
.416 Removed, older violations 66
.420 Valve maintenance. 34
.428 Overpressure safety devices. 30
.440 Public education. 10
.442 Damage Prevention Program 21
.452 Pipeline integrity management in high consequence
areas 8
19
11/3/2011
Part 199, Drugs and Alcohol

128 non compliance
Plans, testing and records most
common.
20
11/3/2011
49 CFR 192 SubPart J
Test Requirements
New, Replaced or Relocated
Pipelines
§192.503 General
requirements.
(a) No person may operate a new segment
of pipeline, or return to service a segment of
pipeline that has been relocated or replaced,
until-
(1) It has been tested in accordance with this
subpart and §192.619 to substantiate the
maximum allowable operating pressure; and
(2) Each potentially hazardous leak has been
located and eliminated.
1
11/3/2011
(c) Except as provided in §192.505(a), if air, natural gas, or

inert gas is used as the test medium, the following
maximum hoop stress limitations apply:
Maximum hoop stress allowed as percentage of SMYS
Class Natural Air or

location Gas inert gas
1 80 80
2 30 75
3 30 50
4 30 40
§192.503 General
requirements.
…
(d) Each joint used to tie in a test
segment of pipeline is excepted from the
specific test requirements of this subpart,
but each non-welded joint must be leak
tested at not less than its operating
pressure.
2
11/3/2011
§192.503 General
requirements.
Interpretation 192.503, March 13 1998
Question #1 What constitutes a segment of
pipeline being "relocated"? First scenario - A
segment of pipeline is cut out and placed on the
side of the ditch. Later, the segment is lowered
back in the ditch and welded.
Answer #1 In the first scenario, same segment of
pipeline is lowered back in the ditch and welded.
This does not constitute relocation or
replacement. Therefore, no testing required.
§192.503 General
requirements.
Second scenario - A segment of pipeline that has
been cut out and instead of being placed on the
side of the ditch, it is transported to an off-site
location for storage and future use. Are these
segments considered to have been "relocated"?
In the second scenario, a segment of pipeline is
cut out and transported off-site for storage and
future use. If this segment is to be used in the
same location then it is not considered relocation,
but if it is to be used in some other location, then,
it is considered relocation.
3
11/3/2011
§192.503 General
requirements.
Question #2 Regarding the phrase "[I]t has been
tested in accordance with this subpart Is the
intention that testing be performed after the
segment of pipe is relocated and before it is
returned to service? or, regardless of when the
segment is tested?
Answer #2 Testing must be performed after the
segment of pipe is relocated and before it is
returned to service as required by § 192.503 (a).
However, for steel pipeline operating at a hoop
stress of 30 percent or more of SMYS, §192.505
(e) allows pre-installation test if the post
installation is impractical and the segment is short.
§192.505 Strength test

requirements…30 percent or more of
SMYS.
(a)…(test parameters)
(b) In a Class 1 or Class 2 location, each
compressor station, regulator station, and
measuring station, must be tested to at least
Class 3 location test requirements.
(c) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of
this section, the strength test must be
conducted by maintaining the pressure at or
above the test pressure for at least 8 hours.
4
11/3/2011
§192.505 Strength test

requirements…30 percent or more of
SMYS.
…(in place testing requirements)
(d) If a component other than pipe is the
only item being replaced or added to a
pipeline, a strength test after installation is
not required…
(e) For fabricated units and short sections of
pipe, for which a post installation test is
impractical, a preinstallation strength test
must be conducted by maintaining the
pressure for at least 4 hours.
§192.507 Test requirements for pipelines

< 30% SMYS and >= 100 psig.
(a) The pipeline operator must use a test procedure
that will ensure discovery of all potentially hazardous
leaks in the segment being tested.
(b) If, during the test, the segment is to be stressed
to 20 percent or more of SMYS and natural gas, inert
gas, or air is the test medium-
(1) A leak test must be made at a pressure between 100 psi
(689 kPa) gage and the pressure required to produce a hoop
stress of 20 percent of SMYS; or
(2) The line must be walked to check for leaks while the
hoop stress is held at approximately 20 percent of SMYS.
5
11/3/2011
§192.507 Test requirements for pipelines

< 30% SMYS and >= 100 psig.
(c) The pressure must be maintained
at or above the test pressure for at
least 1 hour.
§192.509 Test requirements for

pipelines to operate below 100 psig.
(a) The test procedure used must ensure
discovery of all potentially hazardous leaks in
the segment being tested.
(b) Each main that is to be operated at less
than 1 psi (6.9 kPa) gage must be tested to
at least 10 psi (69 kPa) gage and each main
to be operated at or above 1 psig must be
tested to at least 90 psi (621 kPa) gage.
6
11/3/2011
§192.517 Records.
(a) Each operator shall make, and retain for
the useful life of the pipeline, a record of
each test performed under §§ 192.505 and
192.507. The record must contain at least the
following information:
(1) The operator's name, the name of the
operator's employee responsible for making the
test, and the name of any test company used.
§192.517 Records.
(2) Test medium used.
(3) Test pressure.
(4) Test duration.
(5) Pressure recording charts, or other record of
pressure readings.
(6) Elevation variations, whenever significant for
the particular test.
(7) Leaks and failures noted and their disposition.
(b) Each operator must maintain a record of each
test required by §§192.509, 192.511, and 192.513
for at least 5 years.
7
11/3/2011
Subpart E - Pressure Testing
49 CFR 195
Hazardous Liquid Pipelines
§195.300 Scope
This subpart prescribes minimum
requirements for the pressure testing of
steel pipelines. However, this subpart
does not apply to the movement of pipe
under §195.424
8
11/3/2011
§195.302 General
requirements
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this
section and in §195.305(b) , no operator may
operate a pipeline unless it has been pressure
tested under this subpart without leakage. In
addition, no operator may return to service a
segment of pipeline that has been replaced,
relocated, or otherwise changed until it has
been pressure tested under this subpart
without leakage.
Exceptions to Pressure Testing

Older pipelines had exemption until 1998,
testing required by Dec. 7, 2003.
Various older lines with MOP established under
192.406(a)(5) – 4 hour chart or log of pressure
Older CO2 lines or in rural area used for production
Low stress built before 1994, no HVL
Risk based alternative
HVL, low-stress and risk based alternative lines still
retain some exemptions.
9
11/3/2011
Risk-based alternative to
pressure testing older pipelines
§195.303 Risk-based alternative to pressure
testing older hazardous liquid and carbon
dioxide pipelines.
All existing regulated pipelines (except older
HVL, low stress, risk based) should have been
tested or evaluated.
If an older line becomes a regulated line,
195.302 and 195.303 will need to be reviewed
for applicability.
§195.304 Test pressure

The test pressure for each pressure test
conducted under this subpart must be
maintained throughout the part of the system
being tested for at least 4 continuous hours at
a pressure equal to 125 percent, or more, of
the maximum operating pressure and, in the
case of a pipeline that is not visually inspected
for leakage during test, for at least an
additional 4 continuous hours at a pressure
equal to 110 percent, or more, of the
maximum operating pressure
10
11/3/2011
§195.305 Testing of
components
(a) Each pressure test under §195.302 must test all
pipe and attached fittings, including components,
unless otherwise permitted by paragraph (b) of this
section.
If a component is the only item being replaced or
added need not be hydrostatically tested if tested at
the factory or manufactured under quality control
that ensures it is equal to a hydrostatically tested
prototype.
§195.306 Test medium

Water must be used except
LP may be used if outside populated areas,
patrolled, buildings evacuated, continuous
communication
CO2 pipelines – inert gas or CO2 can be
used if meet above
Air or inert gas only in low-stress
pipelines
11
11/3/2011
§195.307 Pressure testing

aboveground breakout tanks.
See API standards
§195.308 Testing of tie-ins

Pipe associated with tie-ins must be
pressure tested, either with the section
to be tied in or separately.
12
11/3/2011
§195.310 Records
(a) A record must be made of each
pressure test required by this subpart,
and the record of the latest test must
be retained as long as the facility tested
is in use
§195.310 Records
(b) The record required by paragraph
(a) of this section must include:
(1) The pressure recording charts;
(2) Test instrument calibration data;
(3) The name of the operator, the name of the
person responsible for making the test, and the
name of the test company used, if any;
(4) The date and time of the test;
(5) The minimum test pressure;
(6) The test medium;
13
11/3/2011
§195.310 Records
(7) A description of the facility tested and the test
apparatus;
(8) An explanation of any pressure discontinuities,
including test failures, that appear on the pressure
recording charts; and,
(9) Where elevation differences in the section
under test exceed 100 feet (30 meters), a profile of
the pipeline that shows the elevation and test sites
over the entire length of the test section.
(10) Temperature of the test medium or pipe
during the test period
14
Routine Operations
and Maintenance
49 CFR 192
Selected code sections
§192.603 General provisions.

(Subpart L, Operations)
(a) No person may operate a segment of
pipeline unless it is operated in accordance
with this subpart.
(b) Each operator shall keep records
necessary to administer the procedures
established under §192.605.
(c) …may…require the operator to amend its
plans and procedures as necessary to
provide a reasonable level of safety.
1
§192.605 Operations and
Maintenance Manual
Amdt. 192-71, eff. 3/14/94
– Must include procedures for operating,
maintaining, repairing pipelines according to L&M.
– Procedures for Subpart I.
Preamble text…
– …this manual may be a comprehensive set of
cross-referenced volumes set up according to
functional subjects.
– Operators are expected to maintain a complete
set of the volumes of the comprehensive
reference manual at one location.
§192.605 Operations and

Maintenance Manual
– Copies of parts of the manual, containing
the information pertinent to particular
functions or facilities in a system, must also
be kept wherever needed for field
operations.
– PHMSA requires operators to prepare
O&M procedures only for those pipeline
facilities within their system.
2
Maintenance and normal
(192.605(b))
operations.
O&M, repair procedures for Subpart L
and M.
Corrosion control, Subpart I.
Make construction records, maps,
operating history available.
Data gathering for incident reporting,
Part 191.

(192.605(b))
operations.
Start up and shut down of pipeline within
MAOP limits, plus buildup.
Maintaining compressor stations, including
isolation and purging.
Starting, operating, shutting down
compressors.
Periodic review of work done to determine
effectiveness/adequacy of procedures and
modifying when deficiencies found.
3
(192.605(b))
operations.
Taking precaution in trenches from
accumulations of gas.
Testing and inspection of pipe-type
bottle holders.
Responding promptly to odors of gas
inside or near a building unless included
in Emergency Plan.
Control Room Management procedures.
Excavations: Unsafe
(192.605)
Accumulations of Vapor or Gas

(9) Taking adequate precautions in
excavated trenches to protect personnel
from the hazards of unsafe
accumulations of vapor or gas, and
making available when needed at the
excavation, emergency rescue
equipment, including a breathing
apparatus and, a rescue harness and
line.
4
Excavations: Unsafe
(192.605)
Accumulations of Vapor or Gas

Check safety devices prior to use
– Flame retardant clothing, respirator, rescue
harness & line
Check atmosphere
Establish exit
Rescue plan
Safety observer
Minimize ignition sources
Reduce gas or vapor accumulation
Change in Class Location
§192.609 Change in class location:

Required study.
– Review present class location, design,
construction, operation, MAOP, physical condition,
affected area
If study shows MAOP exceeds that for new
class location then confirm or revise MAOP
Study and revision must be completed within
24 months of the change in class location.
5
Confirmation or revision of MAOP
If study shows MAOP exceeds that for

new class location then confirm or
revise MAOP
Study and revision must be completed
within 24 months of the change in class
location.

Confirmation or revision of MAOP
1. Previous tests
– .8 for Cl 2, .667 for Cl 3, .555 for Cl 4.
– % SMYS may not exceed .72 for Cl 2, .60 for Cl 3,
.50 for Cl 4.
2. MAOP must be reduced to not exceed
more than that allowed for new pipeline.
3. Tested according to Subpart J
May not exceed established MAOP.
Uprating process is not prohibited under this
section
6
§192.613 Continuing
Surveillance.
Determine and take appropriate action
concerning
– Changes in class location
– Failures
– Leakage history
– Corrosion
– Substantial changes in cathodic protection
requirements
– Other unusual operating and maintenance conditions
If found unsatisfactory but no hazard,
recondition, phase out or reduce MAOP
(GTPC) Surveillance Items
Changes of population densities.

Effect of exposure or movement of
pipeline facilities.
Changes in topography that may have
an effect on pipeline facilities.
Potential for or evidence of tampering,
vandalism, or damage.
7
(GTPC) Surveillance Items
Effects of encroachments on pipeline

facilities.
Potential for gas migration through air intakes
into buildings from vaults and pits.
Potential for, or evidence of, soil or water
accumulation in vaults or pits.
Potential for, or evidence of, excavation
activity.
§192.617 Investigation of
failures
Each operator shall establish
procedures for analyzing accidents and
failures, including the selection of
samples of the failed facility or
equipment for laboratory examination,
where appropriate, for the purpose of
determining the causes of the failure
and minimizing the possibility of a
recurrence.
8
§192.625 Odorization of gas.
(a) A combustible gas in a distribution line must
contain a natural odorant or be odorized so that at a
concentration in air of one-fifth of the lower explosive
limit, the gas is readily detectable by a person with a
normal sense of smell.
(b) A combustible gas in a transmission line in a
Class 3 or Class 4 location must comply with the
requirements of paragraph (a) of this section unless:
– At least 50 percent of the length of the line downstream from
that location is in a Class 1 or Class 2 location;
Odorizing Transmission Lines
MP 0 MP 38 MP 48 MP 82 MP 92 MP 100
Cl. 1 Cl. 3 Cl. 1-2 Cl. 3 Cl. 2

38 mi. 10 mi. 34 mi. 10 mi. 8 mi.
20 miles Cl. 3, 42 miles Cl. 1 & 2

No odorization required
192.625(b) Gas in Cl. 3 & 4 must be odorized

except if 50% downstream is Cl. 1 or 2. 10 miles Cl. 3, 8 miles Cl. 2
Odorization required
9
Odorizing Transmission Lines
Other exemptions
– Lines transporting unodorized gas to
certain facilities before adoption date
– Lateral lines to distribution centers with
50% of the line in Class 1 or 2 locations
– Hydrogen used for feedstock in
manufacturing
Complying with 49 CFR 192.625
1/5 LEL
Class location
Odorant selection
Odorizers and injection rates
Periodic sampling
10
§192.703 General
(Subpart M, Maintenance)
(a) No person may operate a segment
of pipeline, unless it is maintained in
accordance with this subpart.
(b) Each segment of pipeline that
becomes unsafe must be replaced,
repaired, or removed from service.
(c) Hazardous leaks must be repaired
promptly.
§192.705 Transmission lines:

Patrolling
Patrol to observe surface conditions for
– leaks, construction activity, and other factors
affecting safety and operation.
Frequency is determined by the size,
operating pressures, class location, terrain,
weather, and other relevant factors
Methods of patrolling include walking, driving,
flying or other appropriate means of
traversing the right-of-way.
11
Patrol Frequency
Maximum Intervals
Class Location Highway and All other
railroad locations
crossing
1,2 7 1/2 months; but 15 months; but at
at least twice each least once each
calendar year calendar year
3 4 1/2 months; but 7 1/2 months; but
at least four times at least twice each
each calendar calendar year
year
4 4 1/2 months; but 4 1/2 months; but
at least four times at least four times
each calendar each calendar
year year
Additional Patrol/Surveillance
Observations
Encroachment
Erosion, landslide, washout
Exposed pipe
Bridges
Line markers - 192.707
12
Leakage surveys
Leakage surveys of a transmission line must
be conducted at intervals not exceeding 15
months, but at least once each calendar year.
Unodorized lines must be leak surveyed
using leak detector equipment
– (a) In Class 3 locations, at intervals not exceeding
7 1/2 months, but at least twice each calendar
year; and
– (b) In Class 4 locations, at intervals not exceeding
4 1/2 months, but at least four times each calendar
year.
Patrols, Surveillance and Surveys
A patrol, leak survey and continuing

surveillance activity can be combined into
one activity.
13
Line markers
§192.707 Line markers for mains and
transmission lines.
– (a) Buried pipelines. Except as provided in
paragraph (b) of this section, a line marker must
be placed and maintained as close as practical
over each buried main and transmission line:
– (1) At each crossing of a public road and railroad;
and
– (2) Wherever necessary to identify the location of
the transmission line or main to reduce the
possibility of damage or interference.
Line Markers
(b) Exceptions for buried pipelines. Line markers are
not required for the following buried pipelines:
– (1) waterways and other bodies or water.
– (2) Mains in Class 3 or Class 4 locations where a
damage prevention program is in effect under
§192.614.
– (3) Transmission lines in Class 3 or 4 locations
until March 20, 1996.
– (4) Transmission lines in Class 3 or 4 locations
where placement of a line marker is impractical.
(c) Pipelines above ground. Line markers must be
placed and maintained along each section of a main
and transmission line that is located above ground in
an area accessible to the public.
14
Line Markers
(d) Marker warning. The following must be
written legibly on a background of sharply
contrasting color on each line marker:
– (1) The word "Warning," "Caution," or "Danger"
followed by the words "Gas (or name of gas
transported) Pipeline" all of which, except for
markers in heavily developed urban areas, must
be in letters at least 1 inch (25 millimeters) high
with ¼ inch (6.4 millimeters) stroke.
– (2) The name of the operator and telephone
number (including area code) where the operator
can be reached at all times.
Line Marker Locations

Irrigation ditches, canals, drainage ditches
subject to periodic grading,
Agricultural areas, Active drilling or mining
areas.
Waterways or bodies of water subject to
dredging or shipping activities.
Industrial or plant areas
Fence lines
Angle points
15
Record keeping.
Date, location, description of each pipe
repair as long as in service
Date, location, description of each part
repair other than pipe for 5 years.
Patrols, surveys, inspections, tests,
required by Subpart L & M for 5 years or
next action, whichever is longer.
§192.711 Transmission lines: General

requirements for repair procedures.
(a) Each operator shall take immediate temporary
measures to protect the public whenever:
– (1) A leak, imperfection, or damage that impairs its
serviceability is found in a segment of steel transmission line
operating at or above 40 percent of the SMYS; and
– (2) It is not feasible to make a permanent repair at the time
of discovery.
Non IM repairs - the operator shall make permanent
repairs as soon as feasible
IM repairs – see 192.933(d)
No welded patch except as in § 192.717(b)(3)
16
§192.713 Transmission lines: Permanent
field repair of imperfections and damages
(a) Each imperfection or damage that impairs

the serviceability of pipe in a steel
transmission line operating at or above 40
percent of SMYS must be-
– (1) Removed by cutting out and replacing a
cylindrical piece of pipe; or
– (2) Repaired by a method that reliable
engineering tests and analyses show can
permanently restore the serviceability of the pipe.
(b) Operating pressure must be at a safe
level during repair operations.

Permanent field repair of welds.
Each weld that is unacceptable under
§192.241(c) must be repaired as
follows:
– (a) If it is feasible to take the segment of
transmission line out of service, the weld
must be repaired in accordance with the
applicable requirements of §192.245.
17
Permanent field repair of welds.
(b) A weld may be repaired in accordance
with §192.245 while the segment of
transmission line is in service if:
– (1) The weld is not leaking:
– (2) Reduce pressure…stress < 20% SMYS; and
– (3) Grinding…1/8-inch thickness in the pipe weld
remains.
(c) A defective weld which cannot be
repaired …must be repaired by installing a
full encirclement welded split sleeve

Permanent field repair of leaks.
Cut out and replace
Welded split sleeve
Corrosion pit – bolt on clamp
Weld patch with rounded corners if pipe is not
over 40,000 SMYS
Offshore, full encirclement split sleeve
Use method that reliable engineering tests
show can permanently restore serviceability
18
Testing of repairs.
(a) Testing of replacement pipe. If a
segment of transmission line is repaired by
cutting out the damaged portion of the pipe
as a cylinder, the replacement pipe must be
tested to the pressure required for a new line
installed in the same location. This test may
be made on the pipe before it is installed.
Repairs by welding must be inspected
according to 192.241
§192.723 Distribution systems:

Leakage surveys.
(a) Periodic surveys required
(b) Business district + available
openings, once each calendar year, nte
15 months
(c) Outside business districts at least
once every 5 years (nte 63 months),
except cathodically unprotected every 3
years (nte 39 months)
19
Compressors
§192.731 Compressor stations:

Inspection and testing of relief devices.
§192.735 Compressor stations:
Storage of combustible materials.
§192.736 Compressor stations: Gas
detection.
§192.751 Prevention of
accidental ignition
Take steps to minimize danger of
accidental ignition
– Remove ignition source when venting gas
and have fire extinguisher at the site.
– No welding or cutting on pipes or
components containing combustible
mixture in the area.
– Post warning signs where appropriate.
20
Component
Inspection
Regulators, Overpressure
Protection and Emergency
Valves
§192.195 Protection against

accidental overpressuring.
(a) General requirements. Except as
provided in §192.197, each pipeline that is
connected to a gas source so that the
maximum allowable operating pressure could
be exceeded as the result of pressure control
failure or of some other type of failure, must
have pressure relieving or pressure limiting
devices that meet the requirements of
§192.199 and §192.201.
21
§192.739 Pressure limiting and regulating
stations: Inspection and testing
(a) Each pressure limiting station, relief

device (except rupture discs), and
pressure regulating station and its
equipment must be subjected at
intervals not exceeding 15 months, but
at least once each calendar year, to
inspections and tests to determine that
it is–

stations: Inspection and testing
– (1) In good mechanical condition;

– (2) Adequate from the standpoint of capacity and
reliability of operation for the service in which it is
employed;
– (3) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, set to control or relieve at the correct
pressure consistent with the pressure limits of
§192.201(a); and
– (4) Properly installed and protected from dirt,
liquids, or other conditions that might prevent
proper operation.
22
stations: Capacity of relief devices
(a)…This capacity must be determined at intervals

not exceeding 15 months, but at least once each
calendar year, by testing the devices in place or by
review and calculations.
(b)…After the initial calculations, subsequent
calculations need not be made if the annual review
documents that parameters have not changed to
cause the rated or experimentally determined
relieving capacity to be insufficient.
(c)…If a relief device is of insufficient capacity, a new
or additional device must be installed to provide the
capacity required by paragraph (a) of this section.
§192.745 Valve maintenance:

Transmission lines.
(a) Each transmission line valve that might
be required during any emergency must be
inspected and partially operated at intervals
not exceeding 15 months, but at least once
each calendar year.
(b) Each operator must take prompt remedial
action to correct any valve found inoperable,
unless the operator designates an alternative
valve.
23
§192.747 Valve maintenance:
Distribution lines.
(a) Each valve, the use of which may be
necessary for the safe operation of a
distribution system, must be checked and
serviced at intervals not exceeding 15
months, but at least once each calendar year.
(b) Each operator must take prompt remedial
action to correct any valve found inoperable,
unless the operator designates an alternative
valve
§192.751 Prevention of
accidental ignition
Take steps to minimize danger of
accidental ignition
– Remove ignition source when venting gas
and have fire extinguisher at the site.
– No welding or cutting on pipes or
components containing combustible
mixture in the area.
– Post warning signs where appropriate.
24
Subpart F
Operations and Maintenance
49 CFR 195
Hazardous Liquid Pipelines
§195.400 Scope
• This subpart prescribes minimum requirements
for operating and maintaining pipeline systems
constructed with steel pipe.
1
§195.401 General requirements
• (a) Cannot operate or maintain system at lower safety level
required by 195.402 and this subpart
• (b) An operator must make repairs on its pipeline system
according to the following requirements:
• (1) Non Integrity management repairs. Whenever an operator discovers
any condition that could adversely affect the safe operation of its pipeline
system, it must correct the condition within a reasonable time. However, if
the condition is of such a nature that it presents an immediate hazard to
persons or property, the operator may not operate the affected part of the
system until it has corrected the unsafe condition.
• (2) Integrity management repairs. When an operator discovers a condition
on a pipeline covered under § 195.452, the operator must correct the
condition as prescribed in § 195.452(h).
• Compliance dates, all which have passed
§195.402- Procedural Manual

• Manual of written procedures required for normal
operations and maintenance activities, and
handling abnormal operations and emergencies.
• Reviewed once each calendar year, NTE 15
months.
• Prepared before initial operation, parts kept at
locations where O&M activities are conducted
2
• Required procedures
• Construction records, maps, operating history available as
necessary for safe O&M
• Accident investigation and reporting procedures
• Operating, maintenance and repair procedures for Subpart F
and H (corrosion control)
• Identification of immediate response areas
• Minimizing hazards and recurrence of accidents
• Start-up and shutdown of the pipeline

• Required procedures (continued)
• Pressure monitoring on start-up and shut-in if not fail safe
• Monitor pressure, temperature, flow, other data if not fail safe
• Abandonment of facilities, purging, sealing
• Minimize accidental ignition
• Liaison with fire, police, public officials
• Periodically review work done by operator
• Protect personnel in trenches from unsafe accumulations of
vapor/gas and emergency rescue equipment when needed,
including breathing apparatus
• Control Room Management procedures
3
• Abnormal operation, procedures for safety
• When operating design limits are exceeded
• Unintended closure
• Increase/decrease in pressure
• Loss of communications
• Operation of any safety device
• Any other malfunction, deviation, error, which could cause
a hazard

• Abnormal operation, procedures for safety
• Check variations after abnormal operation ends
• Correct variations in pressure, flow, controls
• Notify responsible personnel
• Periodically review response
4
• Emergencies – procedures for safety
• Receive, identify, classify notices of events
• Requiring immediate response by operator
• Notices to fire, police, public officials and communicating to personnel
for corrective action
• Prompt and effective response to notices
• Fire, explosion, accidental release, operational failure, natural disaster
• Personnel, equipment, instruments, tools, material available
as needed

• Taking necessary action, shut down or reduce
pressure to minimize volume of spill
• Control of released liquid, including possible
intentional ignition of flammable HVL
• Minimize public exposure to injury and ignition
• Assist with evacuation, traffic, other actions
• Notify, coordinate with fire, police, public officials,
preplanned and actual response to emergency
5
• In HVL failure, use instruments to assess extent of
vapor cloud and hazardous areas
• Post accident review
• Instructions for recognizing/reporting safety

related conditions
§195.403 Emergency Response

Training.
• Continuing training program
• Carry out procedures,
• Know product characteristics
• Recognize conditions
• Take steps to control, minimize potential
• Knowledge of fire, extinguishers, fire control
• Include, if feasible, simulated emergency condition
• Review once each calendar year NTE 15 months
• Performance, make changes to training, verify supervisors knowledge of
emergency response for their area of responsibility
6
• (1) Location and identification of the following pipeline
facilities;
• (i) Breakout tanks;
• (ii) Pump stations;
• (iii) Scraper and sphere facilities;
• (iv) Pipeline valves;
• (v) Facilities to which §195.402(c)(9) applies;
• (vi) Rights-of-way; and
• (vii) Safety devices to which §195.428 applies.

• (2) All crossings of public roads, railroads, rivers,
buried utilities, and foreign pipelines.
• (3) The maximum operating pressure of each
pipeline.
• (4) The diameter, grade, type and nominal wall
thickness of all pipe.
7
• (b) Each operator shall maintain for at least 3
years daily operating records that indicate-
• (1) The discharge pressure at each pump station;
and
• (2) Any emergency or abnormal operation to which
the procedures under §195.402 apply.

• (c) Each operator shall maintain the following records
for the periods specified;
• (1) The date, location, and description of each repair made to
pipe shall be maintained for the useful life of the pipe.
• (2) The date, location, and description of each repair made to
parts of the pipeline other than pipe shall be maintained for at
least 1 year.
• (3) A record of each inspection and test required by this
subpart shall be maintained for at least 2 years or until the
next inspection or test is performed, whichever is longer.
8
§195.406 Maximum operating
pressure
• (a) Except for surge pressures and other variations from
normal operations, no operator may operate a pipeline at
a pressure that exceeds any of the following:
• Design
• Test pressures
• Pipelines not tested under Subpart E, 80% of test pressure or
highest OP held for 4 or more hours and confirmed by charts
or logs.
• Pressures may not exceed 110 percent of above.
Controls/protective equipment required.
§195.408 Communications
• (a) Each operator must have a communication system
to provide for the transmission of information needed for
the safe operation of its pipeline system.
• (b)…must include
• Monitoring operation data
• Receiving notices
• Two way voice for abnormal operations
• Communications with fire, police, public officials during
emergency, including natural disaster
9
§195.410 Line markers
• (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, each operator shall place and maintain
line markers over each buried pipeline in
accordance with the following:
• (1) Markers must be located at each public road
crossing, at each railroad crossing, and in sufficient
number along the remainder of each buried line so
that its location is accurately known.

• (2) The marker must state at least the following on a
background of sharply contrasting color:
• (i) The word "Warning," "Caution," or "Danger" followed by the words
``Petroleum (or the name of the hazardous liquid transported)
Pipeline'', or ``Carbon Dioxide Pipeline,'' all of which, except for
markers in heavily developed urban areas, must be in letters at least 1
inch (25 millimeters) high with an approximate stroke of \1/4\ inch (6.4
millimeters).
• (ii) The name of the operator and a telephone number (including area
code) where the operator can be reached at all times.
10
• (b) Line markers are not required for buried pipelines located-
• (1) Offshore or at crossings of or under waterways and other bodies of
water; or
• (2) In heavily developed urban areas such as downtown business centers
where-
• (i) The placement of markers is impracticable and would not serve the
purpose for which markers are intended; and
• (ii) The local government maintains current substructure records.
• (c) Each operator shall provide line marking at locations where
the line is above ground in areas that are accessible to the public.
Inspection of ROWs, Navigable

Waters
• §195.412 Inspection of rights-of-way and
crossings under navigable waters.
• Inspect surface conditions 26 times per year, intervals
NTE 3 weeks
• Walking, driving, flying or other means
• Navigable waterway crossings inspections NTE 5
years
11
§195.420 Valve maintenance.
• Maintain valves necessary for safe operation of
the pipeline system in good working order
• Inspect mainline valves 2 times/year, NTE 7-1/2
months
• Protect from unauthorized operation and
vandalism
§195.422 Pipeline Repairs

• Repairs must be made in a safe manner and to
prevent damage to persons or property
• May not use any pipe, valve, or fitting unless
designed and constructed as required by this part
12
§195.424 Pipe movement
• May not move line pipe unless pressure in the line
section reduced to no more than 50% MOP
• May not move line containing HVLs in line joined by
welding unless-
• Impractical to empty line of liquids, procedures to protect
public, warn and evacuate where necessary
• Reduce pressure
• Lines not joined by welding only if impractical to empty,
then reduce pressure and isolate
§195.426 Scraper and sphere

facilities
• Must have relief device on barrel
• Must have pressure indicator or means to
insert/remove if pressure not relieved
13
§195.428 – Overpressure Devices
and Overfill Systems
• Inspect and test pressure limiting devices on all pipelines
once each calendar year, NTE 15 months
• Unless HVL line, then twice each calendar year, NTE 7-
1/2 months
• Relief valves on pressure breakout tanks with HVLs, test
at intervals NTE 5 years
• Inspection and testing applies to overfill protection
systems
• Breakout tanks, overfill according to API 2510 or 2350
§195.430 Firefighting equipment

• Each operator shall maintain adequate firefighting
equipment at each pump station and breakout
tank area. The equipment must be-
• (a) In proper operating condition at all times;
• (b) Plainly marked so that its identity as firefighting
equipment is clear; and,
• (c) Located so that it is easily accessible during a
fire.
14
§195.432 Breakout tanks.
• Inspect in-service tanks once each calendar year,
NTE 15 months
• Inspections may be done according to API 653
and 510 as applicable.
§195.434 Signs
• Each operator must maintain signs visible to the
public around each pumping station and breakout
tank area. Each sign must contain the name of
the operator and a telephone number (including
area code) where the operator can be reached at
all times.
15
§195.436 Security of facilities
• Each operator shall provide protection for each
pumping station and breakout tank area and
other exposed facility (such as scraper traps)
from vandalism and unauthorized entry.
§195.438 Smoking or open

flames
• Each operator shall prohibit smoking and open
flames in each pump station area and each
breakout tank area where there is a possibility of
the leakage of a flammable hazardous liquid or of
the presence of flammable vapors.
16
§195.440 Public awareness
• Follow API 1162 - Public Awareness Programs
for Pipeline Operators
• See common programs
§195.442 Damage Prevention

Program
• Must have a Damage Prevention Program
• See common programs
17
§195.444 CPM leak detection
• Each computational pipeline monitoring (CPM)
leak detection system installed on a hazardous
liquid pipeline transporting liquid in single phase
(without gas in the liquid) must comply with API
1130 in operating, maintaining, testing, record
keeping, and dispatcher training of the system.
§195.446 Control room

management.
• See separate presentation
18
Damage Prevention
Public Safety
Abnormal Operation
Abandonment
Common Requirements
49 CFR Parts 192 and 195
§192.614 Damage Prevention

Program
• Must have a written program (192.614,
195.442) to prevent damage from
excavation activities
• Underground facility operators must belong
to a one-call system
• Respond within 48 hours, excluding
Saturday, Sunday, legal federal and state
holidays
1
Excavation – state law definition
• "Excavation" means the use of tools, powered equipment,
or explosives to move earth, rock, or other materials in
order to penetrate or bore or drill into the earth, or to
demolish any structure whether or not it is intended that
the demolition will disturb the earth. " Excavation"
includes such agricultural operations as the installation of
drain tile, but excludes agricultural operations such as
tilling that do not penetrate the earth to a depth of more
than twelve inches. "Excavation" excludes any activity by
a governmental entity which does not penetrate the earth to
a depth of more than twelve inches. "Excavation" excludes
any underground mining operations that do not involve
disturbance to the earth’s surface.
Underground Facility
• "Underground utility facility" means any item buried or
placed below the surface of the earth or submerged under
water for use in connection with the storage or conveyance
of water or sewage; electronic; telephonic; or telegraphic
communications; television signals; electricity; crude oil;
petroleum products; artificial or liquefied petroleum;
natural gas; coal; steam; hot water; or other substances;
except that it does not include private septic systems in a
one family or two family dwelling not connected to any
other system.
• State law definition
2
§192.614, 195.442 Damage Prevention
Program
• Identify excavators
• Notify public and excavators
• Receive and record notice of excavation
• Notify excavators of the type of markings
• Mark system in excavation area
• Inspect as frequently as necessary
• Dig Safely!!!
Related Damage Prevention Activities
• Inspection of ROW
• Inspection of pipelines
• Pipeline Markers / Signs
3
4
5
Public Education, RP 1162
• The rule requires all pipeline operators to develop and
implement public education programs that address the
following stakeholder audiences:
• Affected public.
• Local officials.
• Emergency responders.
• Excavators/Contractors.
• Land Developers.
• One-Call Centers.
192.616 and 195.440

• (a) written plan that follows guidance in
API RP 1162
• (b) follow general recommendations in
1162 and assess characteristics of operators
pipeline
• (c) follow baseline and supplemental
requirements unless justify why not
practicable
6
192.616 and 195.440
• (d) must educate on
• (1) use one call prior to excavation
• (2) hazards with unintended releases
• (3) physical indications of release
• (4) steps for public safety
• (5) procedures to report an event
192.616 and 195.440

• (e) activities to advise municipalities, school
districts, businesses, and residents of pipeline
facility locations
• (f) comprehensive as necessary
• (g) English and other languages commonly
understood
• (h) program completed by June 20, 2006
• (i) documentation and evaluation available for
review
7
192.616 Master Meter Exemption
• Master meters do not have to prepare a plan
according to API RP 1162.
• Twice annually send messages to customers-
• (1) A description of the purpose and reliability of the
pipeline;
• (2) An overview of the hazards of the pipeline and
prevention measures used;
• (3) Information about damage prevention;
• (4) How to recognize and respond to a leak; and
• (5) How to get additional information.
Public awareness
• Public Awareness Programs should help the public
understand the steps that they can take to prevent
and respond to pipeline emergencies.
• Would residents and public officials along a
transmission line-
• Know about the pipeline?
• Have an awareness of damage prevention?
• Know one-call requirements?
• Know the pipeline location?
• Be able to recognize a leak?
• Know how to report an emergency?
8
Public Awareness FAQs
• What annual audit methods are acceptable?
• As indicated in API RP 1162, there are
three acceptable annual audit methods:
internal self-assessments, third-party audits,
or regulatory inspections.

• Can a pipeline operator combine two or more
stakeholder audience groups into one process?
• Pipeline operators can combine stakeholder
audiences into one process, provided the minimum
message delivery requirements of API RP 1162
are met or exceeded. The messages, delivery
methods, and delivery frequencies must be
appropriate as needed for each audience.
9
• Are pipeline operators required to provide messages in
languages other than English for local public officials and
emergency response officials since their activities require
them to conduct their business primarily in English?
• Each operator is required to implement its program in
English and in other languages commonly understood by a
significant number and concentration of the non-English
speaking population in its areas. Each operator should be
able to provide the basis for their decisions with respect to
this question.

• Q14. Are the RP 1162 supplemental
program recommendations for high
consequence areas equivalent to the external
communications requirements of ASME
B31.8S?
• A14. Yes.
• NEW FAQs published Sept. 9, 2011.
10
§192.605, 195.402 Operations
and Maintenance Manual
• For transmission lines, the manual must also
include procedures for handling abnormal
operations.
• An abnormal condition is a non-emergency
condition on a gas transmission facility that
occurs when the operating design limits have
been exceeded due to a pressure, flow rate, or
temperature change outside the limits of normal
conditions.
Abnormal operation
• Responding to, investigating, and correcting the
cause of:
• (i) Unintended closure of valves or shutdowns;
• (ii) Increase or decrease in pressure or flow rate
outside normal operating limits;
• (iii) Loss of communications;
• (iv) Operation of any safety device; and,
• (v) Any other foreseeable malfunction of a component,
deviation from normal operation, or personnel error
which may result in a hazard to persons or property.
11
Abnormal operation
• Checking variations from normal operation
after abnormal operation has ended
• Check variations after abnormal operation
at critical locations to determine continued
integrity and safe operation (195)
• Notifying responsible operator personnel
• Periodically reviewing the response of
operator personnel
GPTC Appropriate actions for

abnormal conditions.
• (a) The type of condition. See list under
§192.605(c)(1).
• (b) The location where the condition exists (i.e.,
proximity to public).
• (c) The nature of the condition (i.e., the extent to
which it could lead to an emergency situation if
not immediately corrected).
• (d) Its affect on the operation of the operator’s
system.
12
GPTC Appropriate actions to
abnormal conditions.
• Prevention of condition from recurrence.
• Follow-up monitoring.
• Review of personnel response.
Abandonment or inactivation of
facilities.
• To abandon
• Disconnect from all sources of gas
• Purge and ensure no combustible mixture remains
• Seal at the ends (and other openings)
• Offshore – fill with water or inert material
• Except for services, inactive pipelines not being
maintained in accordance with Part 192 must be
disconnected, purged and sealed.
• Pipelines offshore or crossing navigable
waterway, last operator files report to NPMS.
13
• When service to a customer is discontinued,
do one of the following
• Lock valve
• Install mechanical device or fitting in service or
meter to prevent flow of gas
• Disconnect customer’s piping from gas supply
and seal open ends
• Additional slides if needed
14
5/5/2010
Part 193 LNG

(a) This part prescribes safety standards for LNG facilities used
in the transportation of gas by pipeline that is subject to the
pipeline safety laws (49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) and Part 192 of
this chapter.
(b) This part does not apply to:
(1) LNG facilities used by ultimate consumers of LNG or natural
gas.
(2) LNG facilities used in the course of natural gas treatment or
hydrocarbon extraction which do not store LNG.
(3) In the case of a marine cargo transfer system and associated
facilities, any matter other than siting pertaining to the system or
facilities between the marine vessel and the last manifold (or in the
absence of a manifold, the last valve) located immediately before a
storage tank.
(4) Any LNG facility located in navigable waters (as defined in
Section 3(8) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(8)).
1
5/5/2010
§193.2005 Applicability
Significant changes to Part 193 were
effective March 31, 2000.
Facilities constructed before that date
were “grandfathered”
Facilities replaced, relocated or
significantly altered after that date must
comply with new regulations.
§193.2011 Reporting.
Report leaks and spills according to Part
191.
No annual report requirement, but this
will change with the “one rule”
2
5/5/2010
§193.2019 Mobile and

temporary LNG facilities.
Not subject to this part if used for
maintenance or short term application
Must provide state agency with 2 weeks
notice
Subpart B - Siting
Requirements
193.2051 Scope.
Each LNG facility designed, constructed, replaced,
relocated or significantly altered after March 31,
2000 must be provided with siting requirements in
accordance with the requirements of this part and
of NFPA 59A (incorporated by reference) see §
193.2013. In the event of a conflict between this
part and NFPA 59A, this part prevails.
193.2057 Thermal radiation protection.
193.2059 Flammable vapor-gas dispersion
protection.
193.2067 Wind forces.
3
5/5/2010
Subpart C - Design
Section 193.2101 Scope.
Each LNG facility designed after March 31, 2000
must comply with requirements of this part and of
NFPA 59A. In the event of a conflict between this
part and NFPA 59A (incorporated by reference,
see § 193.2013), this part prevails.
Section 193.2119 Records
Sections 2149-2181 Impoundment Design
and Capacity
Section 2187 LNG Storage Tanks
Subpart D - Construction
§193.2301 Scope.
Each LNG facility constructed after
March 31, 2000 must comply with
requirements of this part and of NFPA
59A (incorporated by reference, see §
193.2013). In the event of a conflict
between this part and NFPA 59A, this
part prevails.
4
5/5/2010
Subpart E - Equipment
Section 193.2401 Scope.
After March 31, 2000, each new, replaced,
relocated or significantly altered vaporization
equipment, liquefaction equipment, and control
systems must be designed, fabricated, and
installed in accordance with requirements of this
part and of NFPA 59A (incorporated by reference,
see § 193.2013). In the event of a conflict
between this part and NFPA 59A, this part
prevails.
193.2441Control Center
193.2445Sources of power.
Subpart F - Operations
193.2501 Scope.
193.2503 Operating procedures.
193.2505 Cooldown.
193.2507 Monitoring operations.
193.2509 Emergency procedures.
193.2511 Personnel safety.
193.2513 Transfer procedures.
193.2515 Investigations of failures.
193.2517 Purging.
193.2519 Communication systems.
193.2521 Operating records.
5
5/5/2010
Subpart G - Maintenance
193.2601Scope.
193.2603General.
193.2605Maintenance procedures.
193.2607Foreign material.
193.2609Support systems.
193.2611Fire protection.
193.2613Auxiliary power sources.
193.2615Isolating and purging.
193.2617Repairs.
Subpart G - Maintenance
193.2619 Control systems.
193.2621 Testing transfer hoses.
193.2623 Inspecting LNG storage tanks.
193.2625 Corrosion protection.
193.2627 Atmospheric corrosion control.
193.2629 External corrosion control; buried or submerged
components.
193.2631 Internal corrosion control.
193.2633 Interference currents.
193.2635 Monitoring corrosion control.
193.2637 Remedial measures.
193.2639 Maintenance records
6
5/5/2010
Subpart H - Personnel
Qualifications and Training
193.2701 Scope.
193.2703 Design and fabrication.
193.2705 Construction, installation, inspection, and
testing.
193.2707 Operations and maintenance.
193.2709 Security.
193.2711 Personnel health.
193.2713 Training; operations and maintenance.
193.2715 Training; security.
193.2717 Training; fire protection.
193.2719 Training; records.
Subpart I - Fire Protection

§193.2801 Scope.
Each operator must provide and maintain fire
protection at LNG plants according to sections
9.1 through 9.7 and section 9.9 of NFPA 59A
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.
193.2013). However, LNG plants existing on
March 31, 2000, need not comply with
provisions on emergency shutdown systems,
water delivery systems, detection systems,
and personnel qualification and training until
September 12, 2005.
7
5/5/2010
Subpart J - Security
193.2901Scope.
193.2903Security procedures.
193.2905Protective enclosures.
193.2907Protective enclosure construction.
193.2909Security communications.
193.2911Security lighting.
193.2913Security monitoring.
193.2915Alternative power sources.
193.2917Warning signs.
8
11/3/2011
Control Room Management
Amendments 192-
112, 192-117, 195-93
and 195-97
Proposed Rule
Mandated by PIPES 2006

NPRM September 2008
Proposes specific regulations for control rooms
Includes considerations of human factors
– Fatigue
– Training
– Qualification
1
11/3/2011
Proposed Rule
Proposed 15 changes to federal regulations

Include human factors in O&M
New definitions
Alarm Management, communications
Record keeping
Initial SCADA verification
Control Room Studies
PHMSA
– PSIA 2002 pipeline program
– Controller Certification project
NTSB study on liquid SCADA systems
– Display graphics and alarm management
– Controller training and fatigue data
– Leak detection systems
2
11/3/2011
Key Changes from the NPRM
LNG not included in the rulemaking

Limited scope to control rooms with SCADA systems
Limited applicability to local control panels and field
control rooms
Redefined controller
Limited scope of the rule to persons and operating
centers that directly affect pipeline safety
Definition of SCADA system

Allow operators to define roles and
responsibilities
Removed baseline verification of SCADA
Modified application of API RP 1165 to
systems installed after rule implementation
Removed shift overlap requirement
3
11/3/2011
Requires operators to establish maximum

hours of service limit
Removes prescriptive alarm management but
requires management plan
Near miss review not included
Allows flexibility in change management
Included training for controllers
Removed required periodic qualification
New NPRM, Expedite CRM
NPRM on September 17, 2010

Develop and implement by Aug. 1, 2011
(moved up 18 months) except
(c)(1) – (c)(4) and (e) of the section implement
by Aug. 1, 2012. (moved up 6 months)
Most work will be done in development
Expedited to realize safety benefit
4
11/3/2011
The Final Rule
Effective date of the rule is Feb. 3, 2010.

Implement procedures by Feb. 1, 2013
Procedures by Aug. 1, 2011
Implement (b), (c)(5), (d)(2) and (d)(3), (f) and
(g) by Oct. 1, 2011
Implement (c)(1) through (4), (d)(1), (d)(4),
and (e) by Aug. 1, 2012
Definitions
Added to 192.3 and 195.2

Alarm means an audible or visible means of
indicating to the controller that equipment or
processes are outside operator-defined, safety-
related parameters.
Control room means an operations center
staffed by personnel charged with the
responsibility for remotely monitoring and
controlling a pipeline facility.
5
11/3/2011
Definitions
Controller means a qualified individual who

remotely monitors and controls the safety-
related operations of a pipeline facility via a
SCADA system from a control room, and who
has operational authority and accountability for
the remote operational functions of the pipeline
facility.
Definitions
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

(SCADA) system means a computer-based
system or systems used by a controller in a
control room that collects and displays
information about a pipeline facility and may
have the ability to send commands back to the
pipeline facility.
6
11/3/2011
Incorporated by Reference
192.7
API Recommended Practice 1165
"Recommended Practice for Pipeline SCADA
Displays," (API RP 1165) First edition (January
2007).
Only sections 1, 4, 8, 9, 11.1, and 11.3 apply
unless operator demonstrates not practical.
Incorporated by Reference
195.3
API Recommended Practice 1165
"Recommended Practice for Pipeline SCADA
Displays," (API RP 1165) First Edition (January
2007).
API Recommended Practice 1168 "Pipeline
Control Room Management," (API RP 1168)
First Edition (September 2008). Only sections
5 and 7..
7
11/3/2011
Operations, Maintenance and

Emergency Manuals
192 and 195, include procedures for:

Implementing CRM procedures as required by
the regulation. (O&M manual)
Actions to be taken by a controller in an
emergency. (Emergency plan)

(The Regulation)
§195.446
Applies to pipelines with controller in control
monitoring and controlling through SCADA.
Operators must have and follow written
procedures.
8
11/3/2011

(The Regulation)
192.631
Applies to pipelines with controller in control monitoring and controlling
through SCADA.
Operators must have and follow written procedures.
…except that for each control room where an operator's activities are
limited to either or both of:
(i) Distribution with less than 250,000 services, or
(ii) Transmission without a compressor station, the operator must have
and follow written procedures that implement only paragraphs (d)
(regarding fatigue), (i) (regarding compliance validation), and (j)
(regarding compliance and deviations) of this section.
Compliance Dates
An operator must develop the procedures no later than August 1,
2011, and must implement the procedures according to the
following schedule. The procedures required by paragraphs (b),
(c)(5), (d)(2) and (d)(3), (f) and (g) of this section must be
implemented no later than October 1, 2011. The procedures
required by paragraphs (c)(1) through (4), (d)(1), (d)(4), and (e)
must be implemented no later than August 1, 2012.
The training procedures required by paragraph (h) must be
implemented no later than August 1, 2012, except that any training
required by another paragraph of this section must be
implemented no later than the deadline for that paragraph.
9
11/3/2011
(b) Roles and Responsibilities

Operator must define the following for controllers
(1) … authority and responsibility to make decisions and take actions
during normal operations;
(2) … role when an abnormal operating condition is detected, even if the
controller is not the first to detect the condition, including the controller's
responsibility to take specific actions and to communicate with others;
(3) … role during an emergency, even if the controller is not the first to
detect the emergency, including the controller's responsibility to take
specific actions and to communicate with others; and
(4) A method of recording controller shift-changes and any hand- over of
responsibility between controllers.
(c) Providing Adequate Information
Provide information, tools, processes and

procedures necessary to carry out the roles
and responsibilities
(L) Implement API RP 1165, 1168 sec. 5
(L) Unless operator demonstrates not practical
(API 1165)
(G) Implement sections 1, 4, 8, 9, 11.1, and
11.3 of API RP 1165
10
11/3/2011
(c) Providing Adequate Information
Point to point verification between SCADA and field

equipment when added, removed, changed
Test, verify internal communication for manual
operation once each calendar year, NTE 15 months
Test backup SCADA once each calendar year, NTE 15
months
Procedures when different controller assumes
responsibilities (liquid API RP 1168, section 5)
(d) Fatigue Mitigation
Shift lengths, provide for 8 hours continuous

sleep
Educate controllers/supervisors in fatigue
mitigation
Train controllers/supervisors to recognize
effects of fatigue
Maximum limit on hours-of-service, provide for
emergency deviation if needed
11
11/3/2011
(e) Alarm Management
Written alarm management plan

Review SCADA safety related alarms
Once each calendar month identify points off
scan, alarms inhibited, false alarms, or alarms
with forced/manual values
(e) Alarm Management
Once each calendar year NTE 15 months

– Verify correct safety related set points and
descriptions
– Review alarm management plan
– Monitor content/volume of activity to assure
controllers have sufficient time to analyze and react
to alarms
Address identified deficiencies in alarm
management
12
11/3/2011
(f) Change Management
Assure changes that could affect control room

operations are coordinated by:
– Establish communications between control room,
management, field
– Implement section 7 of AP RP 1168
– Require field to contact control room in emergency
and when making changes
(g) Operating Experience
Incorporate lessons learned into procedures

Review incidents
– (i) Controller fatigue;
– (ii) Field equipment;
– (iii) The operation of any relief device;
– (iv) Procedures;
– (v) SCADA system configuration; and
– (vi) SCADA system performance.
Include lessons learned in training programs
13
11/3/2011
(h) Training
Establish training program

Review for potential improvement once each
calendar year NTE 15 months
195.446(h) Training
Include the following elements

– Responding to abnormal operating conditions (AOC) likely to
occur simultaneously or in sequence
– Use of a computerized simulator or non-computerized method
– Responsibilities for communications under emergency
response procedures
– Provide working knowledge of pipeline system, AOC
– Opportunity to review relevant procedures for setup used
periodically but infrequently, in advance of operation
14
11/3/2011
(i) Compliance Validation
Upon request, operators must submit their

procedures to PHMSA or, in the case of an
intrastate pipeline facility regulated by a State,
to the appropriate State agency.
(j) Compliance and Deviations
An operator must maintain for review during

inspection:
– (1) Records that demonstrate compliance with the
requirements of this section; and
– (2) Documentation to demonstrate that any
deviation from the procedures required by this
section was necessary for the safe operation of a
pipeline facility.
15
Reporting Requirements
Reporting Requirements Overview
Part 191 Reporting
Annual, Incident, Safety Related Condition, Other
Offshore Reporting Requirements
Part 192 Gas Integrity Management
Part 195 Reporting
Annual, Incident, Safety Related Condition, Other
Offshore Related Requirements
Part 199 Annual Drug/Alcohol MIS Report
Special Reporting Requirements
National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS)

http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/library
/forms
Need an Operator ID and PIN
If you do not have one:
Link to request Operator ID
Link to request PIN
Can also access all Paper Forms from On-
line Data Entry screen
1
Office of Pipeline Safety Website
49 CFR Part 191
TRANSPORTATION OF NATURAL
AND OTHER GAS BY PIPELINE;
ANNUAL REPORTS, INCIDENT
REPORTS, AND SAFETY-
RELATED CONDITION REPORTS
Effective Date January 1, 2011. Federal
Register: November 26, 2010 (Volume 75,
Number 227). Amendment 195-95
2
Part 191 Reporting
Annual Reports (Gas)
Transmission and Gathering (Form RSPA F7100.2-1)
Distribution (Form RSPA F7100.1-1)
Incident Reports
Distribution (Form RSPA F7100.1)
Transmission and Gathering (Form RSPA F7100.2)
Safety Related Conditions
No form but requirements covered in 191.25
(and 195.52 for Hazardous Liquids)
Part 191 Reporting

New reports approved January 10, 2011
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/library/forms
Reporting and inspection forms
DIMP
3
Annual Reports Part 191
Reports filed each calendar year
Gas Distribution or Gas Transmission &
Gathering
Due March 15, except that for the 2010
reporting year the report must be submitted
by June 15, 2011
Period is from January 1 to December 31
Gas transmission, gathering, LNG reporting
for CY 2010 extended to August 15, 2011.
(ADB-11-03)
7
Part 191: Exceptions from

Annual Reporting
Distribution
1) Petroleum gas systems which serve fewer
than 100 customers from a single source;
2) Master meter systems;
Transmission and Gathering
1) Non-jurisdictional gathering systems
4
§ 191.7 Report submission
requirements.
(a) General. Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, an operator must submit
each report required by this part
electronically to the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration at
http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov unless an
alternative reporting method is authorized in
accordance with paragraph (d) of this
section.

requirements.
(b) Exceptions. An operator is not required to submit
a safety- related condition report (§ 191.25) or an
offshore pipeline condition report (§ 191.27)
electronically.
(c) Safety-related conditions. An operator must
submit concurrently to the applicable State agency a
safety-related condition report required by § 191.23
for intrastate pipeline transportation or when the
State agency acts as an agent of the Secretary with
respect to interstate transmission facilities.
5
requirements.
(d) Alternative Reporting Method. If electronic reporting
imposes an undue burden and hardship, an operator may
submit a written request for an alternative reporting method to
the Information Resources Manager, Office of Pipeline Safety,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, PHP-20,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington DC 20590. The
request must describe the undue burden and hardship. PHMSA
will review the request and may authorize, in writing, an
alternative reporting method. An authorization will state the
period for which it is valid, which may be indefinite. An operator
must contact PHMSA at 202-366-8075, or electronically to
informationresourcesmanager@dot.gov or make arrangements
for submitting a report that is due after a request for alternative
reporting is submitted but before an authorization or denial is
received.
Annual Report - Transmission and Gathering
Operator General Information

System Description
Mileage Summary of Onshore Transmission, Offshore
Transmission, Onshore Gathering, Offshore Gathering
Material
Steel cathodically Protected (Bare/Coated)
Steel unprotected (Bare/Coated)
Other materials (Cast Iron, Plastic, Other)
Nominal size (unknown, 4”, >4-10, >10-20, >20-28,
>28”)
Installation decade (unknown, pre-1940, 1940-
1949....2000-2009)
Class location (1, 2, 3, 4)
12
6
Annual Report - Transmission and Gathering
Number of Leaks Eliminated/Repaired During

Year
Line type, root-cause
Any known leaks at year-end scheduled for repair
Integrity Management reports now submitted
annually on the new report form
Preparer Information
13
Report Forms
Show forms
14
7
Part 191 Annual Report for
Operator General Information
System Description
Mileage Summary of Mains Categorized
Number of Service Lines
Material and size (unknown, 2”, >2” to 4”….>12”)
Leaks Eliminated/Repaired During Year
Hazardous leaks
Excavation damages
General and on Federal Land, line type, root-cause
Any known leaks at year-end scheduled for repair
Percentage Unaccounted Gas
Additional Information (voluntary) and Preparer
15
§191.12 Distribution Systems.

Mechanical Fitting Failure Reports
Each mechanical fitting failure, as required by
§ 192.1009, must be submitted on a
Mechanical Fitting Failure Report Form
PHMSA F- 7100.1-2.
An operator must submit a mechanical fitting
failure report for each mechanical fitting
failure that occurs within a calendar year not
later than March 15 of the following year
8
Incident Reporting Part 191
Criteria for reporting
When to report
How to report
Online reporting is required after
January 1, 2010
https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/portal
17
https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/portal
9
§191.3 Criteria for Reporting
Incident means any of the following events:
(1) An event that involves a release of gas from a pipeline, or of
liquefied natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, refrigerant gas, or
gas from an LNG facility, and that results in one or more of the
following consequences:
(i) A death, or personal injury necessitating in-patient hospitalization;
(ii) Estimated property damage of $50,000 or more, including loss to
the operator and others, or both, but excluding cost of gas lost;
(iii) Unintentional estimated gas loss of three million cubic feet or
more;
(2) An event that results in an emergency shutdown of an LNG
facility. Activation of an emergency shutdown system for reasons
other than an actual emergency does not constitute an incident.
(3) An event that is significant in the judgment of the operator,
even though it did not meet the criteria of paragraphs (1) or (2) of
this definition.
19
Estimating the cost of an incident:

Property damage includes, but is not limited to,
costs due to:
Property damage to Operator’s facilities and property of
others
Gas lost, including blow-down and purging activities
Facility repair and replacement
Restoration of gas distribution service and relighting
customers
Leak locating
Right-of-way cleanup and damage
Environmental cleanup and damage
20
10
Significant Events?
Items to be considered when determining if

an event may be significant include the
following:
Rupture or explosion
Fire
Loss of Service
Evacuation of people in an area
Involvement of local emergency response
personnel
Degree of media involvement
21
Criteria for Incident Reporting

Note some States have lower reporting
limits on the dollar value for damage
(e.g. Oklahoma $5000, etc.)
FOR EACH STATE THAT YOU OPERATE
A PIPELINE WITHIN, IT IS IMPERATIVE
THAT YOU KNOW THE STATE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS!
22
11
§191.5. Immediate notice of certain incidents.
At the EARLIEST PRACTICABLE MOMENT following
discovery of each incident as defined in §191.3.
Interpretation by OPS clarifies expectation for reporting
within 1-2 hours
Report to National Response Center @ 800-424-
8802 (202-267-2675)
Electronically at http:// www.nrc.uscg.mil
Operated by Coast Guard
The National Response Center will assign an Incident Number
Record it, will be needed for reference and completion of
written report(s)
23
§191.5 What to report (800-424-8802)
The following information is required:

1) Name of operator and person making report and
their telephone numbers
2) The location of the incident
3) The time of the incident
4) The number of fatalities and personal injuries, if
any
5) All other significant facts that are known by the
Operator that are relevant to the cause of the
incident or extent of the damages.
24
12
Written or On-Line Incident Reports
Due within 30 days from incident
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation, PHP-10
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20590
Types Original, Supplemental, Final
If additional information is acquired,
file supplemental report
If Intrastate submit in duplicate to
State Agency
25
§191.22 National Registry of

Pipeline and LNG Operators.
(a) OPID Request. Effective January 1, 2012, each
operator of a gas pipeline, gas pipeline facility, LNG
plant or LNG facility must obtain from PHMSA an
Operator Identification Number (OPID). An OPID is
assigned to an operator for the pipeline or pipeline
system for which the operator has primary
responsibility. To obtain on OPID, an operator must
complete an OPID Assignment Request DOT Form
PHMSA F 1000.1 through the National Registry of
Pipeline and LNG Operators in accordance with §
191.7.
13
(b) OPID validation. An operator who
has already been assigned one or more
OPID by January 1, 2011, must validate
the information associated with each
OPID through the National Registry of
Pipeline and LNG Operators at
http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov, and
correct that information as necessary,
no later than June 30, 2012.

(c) Changes. Each operator of a gas pipeline, gas pipeline
facility, LNG plant or LNG facility must notify PHMSA
electronically through the National Registry of Pipeline and LNG
Operators at http:// opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov of certain events.
(1) An operator must notify PHMSA of any of the following events
not later than 60 days before the event occurs:
(i) Construction or any planned rehabilitation, replacement,
modification, upgrade, uprate, or update of a facility, other than a
section of line pipe, that costs $10 million or more. If 60 day notice is
not feasible because of an emergency, an operator must notify PHMSA
as soon as practicable;
(ii) Construction of 10 or more miles of a new pipeline; or
(iii) Construction of a new LNG plant or LNG facility.
14
(2) An operator must notify PHMSA of any of the following
events not later than 60 days after the event occurs:
(i) A change in the primary entity responsible (i.e., with an
assigned OPID) for managing or administering a safety program
required by this part covering pipeline facilities operated under
multiple OPIDs.
(ii) A change in the name of the operator;
(iii) A change in the entity (e.g., company, municipality)
responsible for an existing pipeline, pipeline segment, pipeline
facility, or LNG facility;
(iv) The acquisition or divestiture of 50 or more miles of a pipeline
or pipeline system subject to Part 192 of this subchapter; or
(v) The acquisition or divestiture of an existing LNG plant or LNG
facility subject to Part 193 of this subchapter.

(d) Reporting. An operator must use
the OPID issued by PHMSA for all
reporting requirements covered under
this subchapter and for submissions to
the National Pipeline Mapping System.
15
Safety Related Condition
(SRC) Reporting Part 191
How to report and the timing for reporting
What must be reported
Criteria for reporting
Reporting exceptions
31
Safety Related Condition (SRC)

Reporting
Must be submitted concurrently to that State agency
for intrastate pipeline transportation and;
if that agency acts as an agent of the Secretary with
respect to interstate transmission facilities.
OPS Fax (202) 366-7128 or mail to address in 191.7
Report is due according to the shorter of the following
(191.25 a):
10 days after discovery of a condition or;
5 days after determination of a condition
32
16
SRC Timetable
Sun Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat
X 1 2 3
Discovery
4 5 6 7 8
Fed.
Holiday 9 10
Must be reported by Day 10 at the latest
191.25 (b) SRC Report – What must be

reported?
Report must be headed "Safety-Related Condition Report“

Provide the following information:
1) Name and principal address of operator.
2) Date of report.
3) Name, job title, and business telephone number of person submitting the
report.
4) Name, job title, and business telephone number of person who determined
that the condition exists.
5) Date condition was discovered and date condition was first determined to
exist.
6) Location of condition, with reference to the State (and town, city, or county) or
Offshore site, and as appropriate, nearest street address, offshore platform,
survey station number, milepost, landmark, or name of pipeline.
7) Description of the condition, including circumstances leading to its discovery,
any significant effects of the condition on safety, and the name of the
commodity transported or stored.
8) The corrective action taken (including reduction of pressure or shutdown)
before the report is submitted and the planned follow-up future corrective
action, including the anticipated schedule for starting and concluding such
action.
34
17
Required Reporting 191.23 (a)
Pipeline that operates at hoop stress of ≥20% SMYS

General corrosion that results in wall thickness less than that
required for the MAOP
Localized corrosion that might result in leakage
Any material defect or physical damage that impairs the
serviceability
Unintended movement or abnormal loading that impairs
serviceability of a pipeline or LNG facility
Overpressure events that cause pipeline or LNG facility to
rise above MAOP (or working pressure for LNG facilities) plus
build-up allowance for limiting devices.
35

Required Reporting 191.23 (a)
Any leak in pipeline or LNG facility that constitutes an
emergency
SRC that could lead to imminent hazard and causes 20% or
more reduction in operating pressure of pipeline or LNG
facility
LNG specific
Any crack or other material defect that impairs structural integrity
or reliability of a LNG facility
Inner tank leakage, ineffective insulation, or frost heave that
impairs the structural integrity of a LNG storage tank
36
18
A closer look at the SRC concerning
corrosion; How do you interpret (a)(1)?
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section,

each operator shall report in accordance with
§191.25 the existence of any of the following safety-
related conditions involving facilities in service:
(1) In the case of the pipeline (other than an LNG

Facility) that operates at a hoop stress of 20 percent
or more of its specified minimum yield strength,
general corrosion that has reduced the wall thickness
to less than that required for the maximum allowable
operating pressure, and localized corrosion pitting to
a degree where leakage might result.
37
SRC Reporting Exceptions 191.23 (b)

(reports not required)
Exists on master meter system or customer-owned
service line;
Incident or results in an incident before SRC report filing
deadline;
Exists on a pipeline that is more than 220 yards from
building intended for human occupancy or outdoor place
of assembly
Except that reports are required for conditions within ROW of an
active railroad, paved road, street, highway; or
SRC is corrected by repair or replacement before filing
deadline for SRC report
*Except for conditions under 192.23 (a)(1) other than localized
pitting on an effectively coated and cathodically protected line
38
19
ANSI Z380.1 GPTC Guide for Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems.
Part 191
Guide Material Appendix G-191-6
Determination Of Reporting Requirements For Safety- Related Conditions
Location Time Factor Type Effect on Facility Operation Report Required
1
General Causes the MAOP to be reduced Yes 2
Corrosion Does not cause the MAOP to be No
reduced
Localized Leakage might result Yes 2
Corrosion Leakage unlikely to result No
Will not be Pitting
corrected Unintended Impairs serviceability Yes
within 5 Movement Does not impair serviceability No
Within Or Loading
working days
220 yards
after Material Impairs serviceability Yes 2
of a
determination Defect or Does not impair serviceability No
building
or 10 Damage
intended
working days Malfunction Causes pressure to increase above Yes
for human
after or MAOP + allowable build-up
occupancy
discovery, Operating Does not cause pressure to increase No
or outdoor
whichever Error above MAOP + allowable build-up
place of
comes first Leak Creates an emergency Yes
assembly
or within Does not create an emergency No
the right- All Other Could lead to an imminent hazard Yes
of-way of Conditions and causes a) 20% or more pressure
an active reduction or b) shutdown
railroad, All others No
paved Will be General Causes the MAOP to be reduced Yes 2
road, corrected Corrosion Does not cause the MAOP to be No
street or within 5 reduced
highway working days Localized Leakage Effectively coated & No
after Corrosion Might cathodically protected
determination Pitting result All other coating/cathodic Yes 2
or 10 protection conditions
working days Leakage unlikely to result No
after All Other All No
discovery,
whichever
comes first
All Other No Report Required
Areas
1 An event which has been reported as an incident (§191.5) is not reportable as a safety-related condition. Report is
not required for any safety-related condition that exists on a master meter system or a customer-owned service line.
2 Does not pertain to pipelines operating at less than 20% SMYS.

39
Additional guidance for pipeline leak

that constitutes an emergency?
GPTC
Guide Material Appendix G-192-11
Gas Leakage Control Guidelines for Natural Gas
Systems (Methane)
Leakage Classification and Action Criteria
5.3 Leak classification and action criteria
Tables 2a, 2b, and 2c.
(a) Leak Grades 1, 2, and 3.
(b) Action Criteria.
(c) Examples of Leak Grades
40
20
GPTC: Guide Material Appendix G-192-11
Grade 1, a leak that represents an existing or

probable hazard to persons or property, and
requires immediate repair or continuous action
until the conditions are no longer hazardous. See
§192.703(c).
Grade 2, a leak that is recognized as being non-
hazardous at the time of detection, but, requires
scheduled repair based on probable future hazard.
Grade 3, a leak that is non-hazardous at the time
of detection and can be reasonably expected to
remain non-hazardous.
192.703 (c) says hazardous leaks must be repaired promptly.
41
Part 191 Special Reporting

Requirements
§191.27 Filing offshore pipeline
condition reports
Pipelines subject to §192.612 (a)
Report must be filed 60 days after
inspection is completed
File written report to address given
in §191.27(b)
42
21
Part 191 Special Reporting
Requirements
§191.27 Report the following information:
1. Name and principal address of operator.
2. Date of report.
3. Name, job title, and business telephone number of
person submitting the report.
4. Total length of pipeline inspected.
5. Length and date of installation of each exposed pipeline
segment, and location, including, if available, the
location according to the Minerals Management Service
or state offshore area and block number tract.
6. Length and date of installation of each pipeline
segment, if different from a pipeline segment identified
under paragraph (a)(5) of this section, that is a hazard
to navigation, and the location, including, if available,
the location according to the Minerals Management
Service or state offshore area and block number tract.
43
§192.612 Underwater inspection

and reburial of pipelines in the Gulf of
Mexico and its inlets
a. Each Operator shall prepare and follow a
procedure to identify its pipelines in the Gulf of
Mexico and its inlets in waters less than 15 feet
(4.6 meters) deep as measured from mean low
water that are at risk of being an exposed
underwater pipeline or a hazard to navigation.
The procedures must be in effect August 10,
2005.
b. Each Operator shall conduct appropriate periodic
underwater inspections of its pipelines in the
Gulf of Mexico and its inlets in waters less than
15 feet (4.6 meters) deep as measured from
mean low water based on the identified risk.
44
22
c. If an Operator discovers that its pipeline is an exposed underwater
pipeline or poses a hazard to navigation, the Operator shall—
1) Promptly, but not later than 24 hours after discovery, notify the
National Response Center, telephone: 1-800-424-8802, of the location
and, if available, the geographic coordinates of that pipeline.
2) Promptly, but not later than 7 days after discovery, mark the
location of the pipeline in accordance with 33 CFR part 64 at the ends
of the pipeline segment and at intervals of not over 500 yards long, except
that a pipeline segment less than 200 yards long need only be marked at
the center; and
3) Within 6 months after discovery, or not later than November 1 of
the following year if the 6 month period is later than November 1
of the year of discovery, bury the pipeline so that the top of the
pipe is 36 inches below the underwater natural bottom (as
determined by recognized and generally accepted practices) for normal
excavation or 18 inches for rock excavation.
i. An operator may employ engineered alternatives to burial that meet or
exceed the level of protection provided by burial.
ii. If an operator cannot obtain required state or Federal permits in time
to comply with this section, it must notify OPS; specify whether the
required permit is State or Federal; and, justify the delay.
45
Part 192 Gas Integrity

Management Reporting
46
23
Now reported on annual report
47

When do I report?
192.945(a) General. An operator must include in its integrity
management program methods to measure whether the
program is effective in assessing and evaluating the integrity of
each covered pipeline segment and in protecting the high
consequence areas. These measures must include the four
overall performance measures specified in ASME/ANSI B31.8S
(incorporated by reference, see § 192.7 of this part), section
9.4, and the specific measures for each identified threat
specified in ASME/ANSI B31.8S, Appendix A. An operator must
submit the four overall performance measures as part of the
annual report required by § 191.17 of this subchapter.
48
24
§ 192.951 Where does an operator file
a report?
An operator must file any report
required by this subpart electronically to
the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration in accordance
with § 191.7 of this subchapter.
49
Part 195 Reporting

195 Reporting Requirements embedded in
Subpart B – Hazardous Liquids
Annual Reports (initial filing due June 15, 2005)
Accident Reports
Offshore Related Reports
§195.57 Filing offshore pipeline condition reports
§195.59 Abandoned underwater facilities report
50
25
49 CFR Part 195 - Transportation
of Hazardous Liquids by Pipeline
Effective Date January 1, 2011. Federal
Register: November 26, 2010 (Volume 75,
Number 227). Amendment 195-95
Annual Report
Incident Report
Safety Related Condition Report
Offshore Pipeline Condition Reports
Abandoned or Deactivation of Facilities
Operator Assistance
National Registry
26
On-line reporting
Web site http://phmsa.dot.gov/
On- data entry
Operator ID and PIN
Links to paper forms
Many other forms available
Inspection
D&A
OQ
§ 195.48 Scope. NEW

This Subpart prescribes requirements for
periodic reporting and for reporting of
accidents and safety-related conditions. This
Subpart applies to all pipelines subject to this
Part. An operator of a Category 3 rural low-
stress pipeline meeting the criteria in §
195.12 is not required to complete those
parts of the hazardous liquid annual report
form PHMSA F 7000-1.1 associated with IM or
high consequence areas.
27
§ 195.49 Annual report. NEW
Each operator must annually complete and submit
DOT Form PHMSA F 7000-1.1 for each type of
hazardous liquid pipeline facility operated at the end
of the previous year. An operator must submit the
annual report by June 15 each year, except that for
the 2010 reporting year the report must be submitted
by August 15, 2011. A separate report is required for
crude oil, HVL (including anhydrous ammonia),
petroleum products, carbon dioxide pipelines, and
fuel grade ethanol pipelines. For each state a pipeline
traverses, an operator must separately complete
those sections on the form requiring information to
be reported for each state.

An accident report is required for each
failure in a pipeline system subject to
this part in which there is a release of
the hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide
transported resulting in any of the
following:
(a) Explosion or fire not intentionally set
by the operator.
28
(b) Release of 5 gallons (19 liters) or more of
hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide, except
that no report is required for a release of less
than 5 barrels (0.8 cubic meters) resulting
from a pipeline maintenance activity if the
release is:
(1) Not otherwise reportable under this section;
(2) Not one described in Sec. 195.52(a)(4);
(3) Confined to company property or pipeline
right-of-way; and
(4) Cleaned up promptly;
§195.50 Reporting accidents

(c) Death of any person;
(d) Personal injury necessitating
hospitalization;
(e) Estimated property damage,
including cost of clean-up and recovery,
value of lost product, and damage to
the property of the operator or others,
or both, exceeding $50,000.
29
certain accidents.
(a) Notice requirements. At the earliest
practicable moment following discovery
of a release of the hazardous liquid or
carbon dioxide transported resulting in
an event described in § 195.50, the
operator of the system must give
notice, in accordance with paragraph
(b) of this section, of any failure that:

certain accidents.
(1) Caused a death or a personal injury
requiring hospitalization;
(2) Resulted in either a fire or explosion not
intentionally set by the operator;
(3) Caused estimated property damage,
including cost of cleanup and recovery, value
of lost product, and damage to the property
of the operator or others, or both, exceeding
$50,000;
30
certain accidents.
(4) Resulted in pollution of any stream, river,
lake, reservoir, or other similar body of water
that violated applicable water quality
standards, caused a discoloration of the
surface of the water or adjoining shoreline, or
deposited a sludge or emulsion beneath the
surface of the water or upon adjoining
shorelines; or
(5) In the judgment of the operator was
significant even though it did not meet the
criteria of any other paragraph of this section.

certain accidents.
(b) Information required. Each notice
required by paragraph (a) of this
section must be made to the National
Response Center either by telephone to
800-424-8802 (in Washington, DC, 202-
267-2675) or electronically at
http://www.nrc.uscg.mil and must
include the following information:
31
certain accidents.
(1) Name, address and identification
number of the operator.
(2) Name and telephone number of the
reporter.
(3) The location of the failure.
(4) The time of the failure.

certain accidents.
(5) The fatalities and personal injuries, if
any.
(6) Initial estimate of amount of product
released in accordance with paragraph (c) of
this section.
(7) All other significant facts known by the
operator that are relevant to the cause of the
failure or extent of the damages.
32
certain accidents.
(c) Calculation. A pipeline operator must
have a written procedure to calculate and
provide a reasonable initial estimate of the
amount of released product.
(d) New information. An operator must
provide an additional telephonic report to the
NRC if significant new information becomes
available during the emergency response
phase of a reported event at the earliest
practicable moment after such additional
information becomes known.
§ 195.54 Accident reports.

(a) Each operator that experiences an
accident that is required to be reported under
§ 195.50 must, as soon as practicable, but
not later than 30 days after discovery of the
accident, file an accident report on DOT Form
7000-1.
(b) Whenever an operator receives any
changes in the information reported or
additions to the original report on DOT Form
7000-1, it shall file a supplemental report
within 30 days.
33
§195.55 Reporting safety-
related conditions.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, each operator shall report in accordance with
§195.56 the existence of any of the following safety-
related conditions involving pipelines in service:
(1) General corrosion that has reduced the wall thickness to
less than that required for the maximum operating pressure,
and localized corrosion pitting to a degree where leakage
might result.
(2) Unintended movement or abnormal loading of a pipeline
by environmental causes, such as an earthquake, landslide,
or flood, that impairs its serviceability.

related conditions.
(3) Any material defect or physical damage that
impairs the serviceability of a pipeline.
(4) Any malfunction or operating error that
causes the pressure of a pipeline to rise above
110 percent of its maximum operating pressure.
(5) A leak in a pipeline that constitutes an
emergency.
(6) Any safety-related condition that could lead to
an imminent hazard and causes (either directly or
indirectly by remedial action of the operator), for
purposes other than abandonment, a 20 percent
or more reduction in operating pressure or
shutdown of operation of a pipeline.
34
related conditions.
(b) A report is not required for any safety-
related condition that-
(1) Exists on a pipeline that is more than 220
yards (200 meters) from any building intended for
human occupancy or outdoor place of assembly,
except that reports are required for conditions
within the right-of-way of an active railroad, paved
road, street, or highway, or that occur offshore or
at onshore locations where a loss of hazardous
liquid could reasonably be expected to pollute any
stream, river, lake, reservoir, or other body of
water;

related conditions.
(2) Is an accident that is required to be reported
under §195.50 or results in such an accident
before the deadline for filing the safety-related
condition report; or
(3) Is corrected by repair or replacement in
accordance with applicable safety standards
before the deadline for filing the safety-related
condition report, except that reports are required
for all conditions under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section other than localized corrosion pitting on an
effectively coated and cathodically protected
pipeline.
35
§195.56 Filing safety-related
condition reports.
(a) Each report of a safety-related condition under
§195.55(a) must be filed (received by the
Administrator) in writing within 5 working days (not
including Saturdays, Sundays, or Federal holidays)
after the day a representative of the operator first
determines that the condition exists, but not later
than 10 working days after the day a representative
of the operator discovers the condition. Separate
conditions may be described in a single report if they
are closely related. To file a report by facsimile (fax),
dial (202) 366-7128.
SRC Timetable
Sun Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat
X 1 2 3
Discovery
4 5 6 7 8
Fed.
Holiday 9 10
Must be reported by Day 10 at the latest
36
condition reports.
(b) The report must be headed "Safety-
Related Condition Report" and provide the
following information:
(1) Name and principal address of operator.
(2) Date of report.
(3) Name, job title, and business telephone number of
person submitting the report.
(4) Name, job title, and business telephone number of
person who determined that the condition exists.
(5) Date condition was discovered and date condition
was first determined to exist.

condition reports.
(6) Location of condition, with reference to the State (and
town, city, or county) or offshore site, and as appropriate
nearest street address, offshore platform, survey station
number, milepost, landmark, or name of pipeline.
(7) Description of the condition, including circumstances
leading to its discovery, any significant effects of the
condition on safety, and the name of the commodity
transported or stored.
(8) The corrective action taken (including reduction of
pressure or shutdown) before the report is submitted and
the planned follow-up or future corrective action, including
the anticipated schedule for starting and concluding such
action.
37
§195.57 Filing offshore
pipeline condition reports.
Information on offshore pipeline
inspections, exposed pipeline and
pipeline segments.

requirements.
(a) General. Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, an operator must submit
each report required by this part
electronically to PHMSA at
http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov unless an
alternative reporting method is authorized in
accordance with paragraph (d) of this
section.
(b) Exceptions. An operator is not required
to submit a safety- related condition report (§
195.56) or an offshore pipeline condition
report (§ 195.67) electronically.
38
requirements.
(c) Safety-related conditions. An
operator must submit concurrently to
the applicable State agency a safety-
related condition report required by §
195.55 for an intrastate pipeline or
when the State agency acts as an agent
of the Secretary with respect to
interstate pipelines.

requirements.
(d) Alternate Reporting Method. If electronic reporting imposes
an undue burden and hardship, the operator may submit a
written request for an alternative reporting method to the
Information Resources Manager, Office of Pipeline Safety,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, PHP-20,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington DC 20590. The
request must describe the undue burden and hardship. PHMSA
will review the request and may authorize, in writing, an
alternative reporting method. An authorization will state the
period for which it is valid, which may be indefinite. An operator
must contact PHMSA at 202-366-8075, or electronically to
"informationresourcesmanager@dot.gov" to make arrangements
for submitting a report that is due after a request for alternative
reporting is submitted but before an authorization or denial is
received.
39
§ 195.59 Abandonment or
deactivation of facilities.
For each abandoned offshore pipeline facility
or each abandoned onshore pipeline facility
that crosses over, under or through a
commercially navigable waterway, the last
operator of that facility must file a report
upon abandonment of that facility.
Preferred method is to use the National
Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS)…
§195.60 Operator assistance in

investigation.
If the Department of Transportation
investigates an accident, the operator
involved shall make available to the
representative of the Department all
records and information that in any way
pertain to the accident, and shall afford
all reasonable assistance in the
investigation of the accident.
40
§ 195.63 OMB control number
assigned to information collection.
The control numbers assigned by the
Office of Management and Budget to
the hazardous liquid pipeline
information collection pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act are 2137-
0047, 2137-0601, 2137-0604, 2137-
0605, 2137-0618, and 2137-0622.
§ 195.64 National Registry of

(a) OPID Request. Effective January 1, 2012,
each operator of a hazardous liquid pipeline
or pipeline facility must obtain from PHMSA
an Operator Identification Number (OPID).
An OPID is assigned to an operator for the
pipeline or pipeline system for which the
operator has primary responsibility. To obtain
an OPID or a change to an OPID, an operator
must complete an OPID Assignment Request
DOT Form PHMSA F 1000.1 through the
National Registry of Pipeline and LNG
Operators in accordance with § 195.58.
41
(b) OPID validation. An operator who
has already been assigned one or more
OPID by January 1, 2011 must validate
the information associated with each
such OPID through the National
Registry of Pipeline and LNG Operators
at http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov, and
correct that information as necessary,
no later than June 30, 2012.

(c) Changes. Each operator must notify PHMSA
electronically through the National Registry of
Pipeline and LNG Operators at
http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov, of certain events.
(1) An operator must notify PHMSA of any of the following
events not later than 60 days before the event occurs:
(i) Construction or any planned rehabilitation, replacement,
modification, upgrade, uprate, or update of a facility, other
than a section of line pipe, that costs $10 million or more. If 60
day notice is not feasible because of an emergency, an
operator must notify PHMSA as soon as practicable;
(ii) Construction of 10 or more miles of a new hazardous liquid
pipeline; or
(iii) Construction of a new pipeline facility.
42
(2) An operator must notify PHMSA of any
following event not later than 60 days after the
event occurs:
(i) A change in the primary entity responsible (i.e., with
an assigned OPID) for managing or administering a
safety program required by this part covering pipeline
facilities operated under multiple OPIDs.
(ii) A change in the name of the operator;
(iii) A change in the entity (e.g., company, municipality)
responsible for operating an existing pipeline, pipeline
segment, or pipeline facility;
(iv) The acquisition or divestiture of 50 or more miles of
pipeline or pipeline system subject to this part; or
(v) The acquisition or divestiture of an existing pipeline
facility subject to this part.

(d) Reporting. An operator must use
the OPID issued by PHMSA for all
reporting requirements covered under
this subchapter and for submissions to
the National Pipeline Mapping System.
43
a. Except for gathering lines of 4 1/2 inches (114mm)
nominal outside diameter or smaller, each operator
shall prepare and follow a procedure to identify its
pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico and its inlets in
waters less than 15 feet (4.6 meters) deep as
measured from mean low water that are at risk of
being an exposed underwater pipeline or a hazard
to navigation. The procedures must be in effect
August 10, 2005.
b. Each operator shall conduct appropriate periodic
underwater inspections of its pipelines in the Gulf of
Mexico and its inlets in waters less than 15 feet (4.6
meters) deep as measured from mean low water
based on the identified risk.
87

c. If an Operator discovers that its pipeline is an exposed underwater
pipeline or poses a hazard to navigation, the Operator shall—
1) Promptly, but not later than 24 hours after discovery, notify the
National Response Center, telephone: 1-800-424-8802, of the location
and, if available, the geographic coordinates of that pipeline.
2) Promptly, but not later than 7 days after discovery, mark the
location of the pipeline in accordance with 33 CFR part 64 at the ends
of the pipeline segment and at intervals of not over 500 yards long, except
that a pipeline segment less than 200 yards long need only be marked at
the center; and
3) Within 6 months after discovery, or not later than November 1 of
the following year if the 6 month period is later than November 1
of the year of discovery, bury the pipeline so that the top of the
pipe is 36 inches below the underwater natural bottom (as
determined by recognized and generally accepted practices) for normal
excavation or 18 inches for rock excavation.
i. An operator may employ engineered alternatives to burial that meet or
exceed the level of protection provided by burial.
ii. If an operator cannot obtain required state or Federal permits in time
to comply with this section, it must notify OPS; specify whether the
required permit is State or Federal; and, justify the delay.
88
44
Part 199 Reporting
89
Part 199 Reporting

Part 199 covers drug & alcohol reporting
form Parts 192, 193, and 195
General Review of the Overall Requirements in
Part 199
90
45
This is a partial overview of Part
199
If you are involved with the
compliance of this Part,
More comprehensive knowledge is
required!
91
Part 199 - MIS Annual Reports

Part 199 Requirement
Each large operator (having more than 50
covered employees) must submit an annual
MIS (Management Information System)
reports to RSPA with the results of;
Drug Testing
Alcohol Testing
By March 15 for the full previous calendar
year
Report can be filed on-line
Some very minor exceptions in 199.2 but
will not cover here
92
46
Part 199 Operator Substance Abuse
Prevention Program – Drug/Alcohol
Testing
Covered Personnel
Operations
Maintenance*
Emergency Response
Operator is responsible to assure
Contractors have a program
Company and Contractors
93
Drug/Alcohol Testing
Pre-employment screening
Random employee testing
For-cause*
If positive,
Follow-up
Return to duty
Post Accident
94
47
Post Accident/Incident Testing
Accident / Incident means
incident reportable under Part 191 gas pipeline
facilities or LNG facilities
accident reportable under Part 195 of this chapter
involving hazardous liquid pipeline facilities.
Drug Testing - As soon as possible but no later than
32 hours after an accident
Alcohol Testing – shorter timeline (within 2 hours or
Operator shall prepare & maintain on file a record
stating why not properly administered)
Test each employee whose performance either
contributed to the accident or cannot be completely
discounted as a contributing factor 95
Special Reporting Requirements

Updating the National Pipeline Mapping
System (NPMS)
96
48
Advisory Bulletin (ADB-03-02)
Pipeline Safety: Required Submission of Data to
the National Pipeline Mapping System Under the
Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002
SUMMARY: The Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) is issuing

this advisory bulletin to owners and operators of natural
gas transmission and hazardous liquid pipeline systems.
The purpose of this bulletin is to advise pipeline operators
of their responsibilities in complying with the Pipeline
Safety Improvement Act of 2002. Specifically, this bulletin
indicates the process for making new submissions of
geospatial and operator contact information, updating
previous submissions to the National Pipeline Mapping
System (NPMS), and providing future submissions.
97

The Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-355),
49 U.S.C. 60132, ``National Pipeline Mapping System,'' enacted on
December 17, 2002, requires the following:
a) Information to be Provided--Not later than six months after the date of enactment
of this section, the operator of a pipeline facility (except distribution lines and
gathering lines) shall provide to the Secretary of Transportation the following
information with respect to the facility:
1) Geospatial data appropriate for use in the National Pipeline Mapping System or
data in a format that can be readily converted to geospatial data.
2) The name and address of the person with primary operational control to be
identified as its operator for purposes of this chapter.
3) A means for a member of the public to contact the operator for additional
information about the pipeline facilities it operates.
b) Updates--A person providing information under subsection (a) shall provide to the
Secretary updates of the information to reflect changes in the pipeline facility
owned or operated by the person and as otherwise required by the Secretary.
98
49
National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS)
Reporting (Data Submission)
Hazardous Liquids Lines

Gas Transmission Lines
Submissions due June 17, 2003
Annual updates required if any pipeline
changes
NPMS Submission standard
https://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/
99
50
Federal Register Volume 77, Number 246 (Friday, December 21, 2012)
[Notices] [Pages 75699-75700]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[Docket No. PHMSA-2012-0308]
Pipeline Safety: Reporting of Exceedances of Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA); DOT.
ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory Bulletin.
SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing this Advisory Bulletin to inform owners and operators of gas
transmission pipelines that if the pipeline pressure exceeds maximum allowable operating
pressure (MAOP) plus the build-up allowed for operation of pressure-limiting or control devices,
the owner or operator must report the exceedance to PHMSA on or before the fifth day following
the date on which the exceedance occurs. If the pipeline is subject to the regulatory authority of
one of PHMSA's State Pipeline Safety Partners, the exceedance must also be reported to the
applicable state agency.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cameron Satterthwaite by phone at 202- 366-

1319 or by email at cameron.satterthwaite@dot.gov. Information about PHMSA may be found at
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On January 3, 2012, President Obama signed the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job
Creation Act of 2011. Section 23 (a) of the Act amended 49 U.S.C. Chapter 601 to add “Sec.
60139. Maximum allowable operating pressure.” Specifically, Sec. 60139 (b) (2) states:
If there is an exceedance of the maximum allowable operating pressure with respect to a gas
transmission pipeline of an owner or operator of a pipeline facility that exceeds the build-up
allowed for operation of pressure-limiting or control devices, the owner or operator shall report
the exceedance to the Secretary and appropriate State authorities on or before the 5th day
following the date on which the exceedance occurs.
This reporting requirement is applicable to all gas transmission pipeline facility owners and
operators. In order to comply with this self-executing provision, PHMSA advises owners and
operators to submit this information in the same manner as safety-related condition reports
(SRCR). The information submitted by owners and operators should comport with the
information listed in Sec. 191.25(b), and the reporting methods listed in Sec. 191.25(a) should be
employed.
The reporting exemptions for SRCR listed in Sec. 191.23(b) do not apply to the reporting
requirement for exceedance of MAOP plus build- up. Specifically, Sec. 191.23(b)(4), which
allows for non-reporting if the safety-related condition is corrected by repair or replacement in
accordance with applicable safety standards before the deadline for filing the SRCR, does not
apply. Gas transmission owners and operators must report the exceedance of MAOP plus build-
up regardless of whether the exceedance was corrected before five days have passed.
Finally, owners and operators have five days after occurrence to report exceedance of MAOP
plus build-up.
II. Advisory Bulletin (ADB-2012-11)
To: Owners and Operators of Gas Transmission Pipeline Facilities.
Subject: Reporting of Exceedances of Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure.
Advisory: Section 23 of the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011
requires owners and operators of gas transmission pipeline facilities to report any exceedance of
the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) plus the build-up allowed for operation of
pressure-limiting or control devices. This requirement further specifies that such exceedances
must be reported within five calendar days of the exceedance. PHMSA is issuing this Advisory
Bulletin to notify operators to submit information comparable to that required for Safety-Related
Condition reports as outlined in Sec. 191.25(b) for reports of exceedance. The report should be
titled “Gas Transmission MAOP Exceedance” and provide the following information:
· The name and principal address of the operator, date of the report, name, job title, and
business telephone number of the person submitting the report.
· The name, job title, and business telephone number of the person who determined the
condition exists.
· The date the condition was discovered and the date the condition was first determined to
exist.
· The location of the condition, with reference to the town/ city/county and state or
offshore site, and as appropriate, nearest street address, offshore platform, survey station number,
milepost, landmark, and the name of the commodity transported or stored.
· The corrective action taken before the report was submitted and the planned follow-up or
future corrective action, including the anticipated schedule for starting and concluding such
action.
These reports must be submitted within five days of the occurrence using one of the reporting
methods described in Sec. 191.25(a). PHMSA is poised to issue a final rule modifying this
regulation to include electronic mail (email) as an acceptable reporting method for SRCR.
PHMSA encourages gas transmission owners and operators to report MAOP plus build-up
exceedances by emailing information to InformationResourcesManager@dot.gov. Reports may
also be submitted by fax to (202) 366-7128.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 18, 2012.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Deputy Associate Administrator Field Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-30770 Filed 12-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 2012 / Notices 72435
366–1562, or via email at system and reported that there are some 5124 or by email at
gerald.yakowenko@dot.gov. For legal domestic manufacturers of alan.mayberry@dot.gov. All materials in
questions, please contact Mr. Michael subcomponents to the motor and this docket may be accessed
Harkins, FHWA Office of the Chief machinery brake system. However, the electronically at http://
Counsel, (202) 366–4928, or via email at subcomponents are not compatible with www.regulations.gov. General
michael.harkins@dot.gov. Office hours the specified motor and machinery information about the PHMSA Office of
for the FHWA are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 brakes. Based on all the information Pipeline Safety (OPS) can be obtained
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, available to the agency, the FHWA by accessing OPS’s Internet home page
except Federal holidays. concludes that there are no domestic at http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: manufacturers of Motor and Machinery SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Brakes; 16″-Diameter Motor Brakes,
Electronic Access I. Background
weight 340 lb and 13″-Diameter
An electronic copy of this document Machinery Brakes, weight 250 lb for PHMSA’s integrity management
may be downloaded from the Federal rehabilitation of Murray Morgan Bridge regulations require operators to
Register’s home page at: http:// project #STP–STPUL–3268(003) and establish processes to evaluate the
www.archives.gov and the Government South Park Bridge Replacement project effectiveness of their integrity
Printing Office’s database at: http:// #TIGERII–BRM–STPL–1491(002) in management programs. Program
www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Washington State. evaluation is one of the key required
Background In accordance with the provisions of program elements as established in the
section 117 of the SAFETEA–LU integrity management rules. For
The FHWA’s Buy America policy in Technical Corrections Act of 2008 (Pub.
23 CFR 635.410 requires a domestic hazardous liquid pipelines,
L. 110–244, 122 Stat. 1572), the FHWA §§ 195.452(f)(7) and 195.452(k) require
manufacturing process for any steel or is providing this notice as its finding
iron products (including protective methods to measure program
that a waiver of Buy America effectiveness:
coatings) that are permanently requirements is appropriate. The FHWA
incorporated in a Federal-aid § 195.452(f) What are the elements
invites public comment on this finding of an integrity management program?
construction project. The regulation also for an additional 15 days following the
provides for a waiver of the Buy An integrity management program
effective date of the finding. Comments begins with the initial framework. An
America requirements when the may be submitted to the FHWA’s Web
application would be inconsistent with operator must continually change the
site via the link provided to the program to reflect operating experience,
the public interest or when satisfactory Washington State waiver page noted
quality domestic steel and iron products conclusions drawn from results of the
above. integrity assessments, other
are not sufficiently available. This
notice provides information regarding Authority: 23 U.S.C. 313; Pub. L. 110–161, maintenance and surveillance data, and
the FHWA’s finding that a Buy America 23 CFR 635.410). evaluation of consequences of a failure
waiver is appropriate to use non- Issued on: November 26, 2012. on the high consequence area. An
domestic Motor and Machinery Brakes; Victor M. Mendez, operator must include, at minimum,
16″-Diameter Motor Brakes, weight 340 each of the following elements in its
Administrator.
lb, and 13″ -Diameter Machinery Brakes, written integrity management program:
[FR Doc. 2012–29329 Filed 12–4–12; 8:45 am]
weight 250 lb, for rehabilitation of * * * * *
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
Murray Morgan Bridge, project #STP– (7) Methods to measure the program’s
STPUL–3268(003), and South Park effectiveness (see paragraph (k) of this
Bridge Replacement, project #TIGERII– DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION section);
BRM–STPL–1491(002), in the State of § 195.452(k) What methods to
Washington. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials measure program effectiveness must be
In accordance with Title I, Division C, Safety Administration used? An operator’s program must
section 122 of the ‘‘Consolidated and include methods to measure whether
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, [Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0279] the program is effective in assessing and
2012’’ (Pub. L. 112–55), the FHWA evaluating the integrity of each pipeline
Pipeline Safety: Using Meaningful
published a notice of intent to issue a segment and in protecting the high
Metrics in Conducting Integrity
waiver on its Web site for Motor and consequence areas. (See Appendix C of
Management Program Evaluations
Machinery Brakes; 16″-Diameter Motor this part for guidance on methods that
Brakes, weight 340 lb and 13″-Diameter AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous can be used to evaluate a program’s
Machinery Brakes, weight 250 lb (http:// Materials Safety Administration effectiveness.)
www.fhwa.dot.gov/construction/ (PHMSA), DOT. Appendix C provides more specific
contracts/waivers.cfm?id=64) on ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory guidance on establishing performance
November 14, 2011. The FHWA Bulletin. measures, including the need to select
received no comment in response to the measures based on the understanding
publication. During the 15-day comment SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an and analysis of integrity threats to each
period, the FHWA conducted additional Advisory Bulletin to remind operators pipeline segment. Appendix C also
nationwide review to locate potential of gas transmission and hazardous describes three general types of metrics
domestic manufacturers of Motor and liquid pipeline facilities of their that an integrity management program
Machinery Brakes; 16″-Diameter Motor responsibilities, under Federal integrity should have:
Brakes, weight 340 lb and 13″-Diameter management regulations, to perform • Activity Measures that monitor the
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
Machinery Brakes, weight 250 lb. The evaluations of their integrity surveillance and preventive activities
National Institute of Standards and management programs using meaningful that are in place to control risk. These
Technology—Manufacturing Extension performance metrics. measures indicate how well an operator
Partnership also conducted supplier FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: is implementing the elements of its
scouting on motor and machinery Alan Mayberry by phone at 202–366– integrity management program.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:56 Dec 04, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM 05DEN1
72436 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 2012 / Notices
• Deterioration Measures that annual report required by § 191.17 of (22) methods used to measure the
monitor operational and maintenance this subchapter. program’s effectiveness.
trends to indicate if the program is (b) External Corrosion Direct The comparable gas transmission
successful or weakening, or if the Assessment (ECDA). In addition to the integrity management program
desired outcome is being achieved or general requirements for performance requirements are:
not, despite the risk control activities in measures in paragraph (a) of this
place. section, an operator using direct § 192.947 What records must be kept?
• Failure Measures that reflect assessment to assess an external An operator must maintain, for the
whether the program is effective in corrosion threat must define and useful life of the pipeline, records that
achieving the objective of improving monitor measures to determine the demonstrate compliance with the
integrity. These are typically lagging effectiveness of the ECDA process. requirements of this subpart. At
indicators that measure the number of These measures must meet the minimum, an operator must maintain
releases, the volume spilled, percent requirements of § 192.925. the following records for review during
recovered, etc. The gas transmission requirements an inspection.
Section 13 ‘‘Program Evaluation’’ of invoke ASME B31.8S–2004, Managing * * * * *
API Standard 1160, Managing Integrity System Integrity of Gas Pipelines. (d) Documents to support any
for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines also Section 9 of this standard provides decision, analysis, and process
provides additional guidance on the guidance on the selection of developed and used to implement and
program evaluation process in which performance measures. It describes evaluate each element of the baseline
these measures are used to improve three categories of measures that are assessment plan and integrity
performance. directly analogous to those noted above management program. Documents
For gas transmission pipelines, in Appendix C of Part 195. These are: include those developed and used in
§§ 192.911(i) and 192.945 define the • Process or Activity Measures used support of any identification,
requirements for establishing to evaluate preventive and mitigation calculation, amendment, modification,
performance metrics and evaluating activities. These determine how well an
justification, deviation and
integrity management program operator is implementing the various
determination made, and any action
performance. elements of its integrity management
taken, to implement and evaluate any of
program.
§ 192.911 What are the elements of an • Operational Measures, which the program elements;
integrity management program? include operational and maintenance PHMSA’s inspection protocols
An operator’s initial integrity trends that measure how well the currently address the need to examine
management program begins with a system is responding to the integrity operator compliance with these
framework (see § 192.907) and evolves management program. requirements.
into a more detailed and comprehensive • Direct Integrity Measures, which In its report on the September 9, 2010,
integrity management program as include leaks, ruptures, injuries, and gas pipeline accident in San Bruno,
information is gained and incorporated fatalities. California, the National Transportation
into the program. An operator must Furthermore, the hazardous liquid Safety Board (NTSB) identified concerns
make continual improvements to its and gas transmission integrity with Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s
program. The initial program framework management rules also require that (PG&E) self-assessments of its integrity
and subsequent program must, at operators retain adequate records to management program. NTSB concluded
minimum, contain the following support integrity management program that the company’s self-assessments
elements. (When indicated, refer to decisions and activities. These include were ‘‘superficial and resulted in no
ASME/ANSI B31.8S incorporated by the information that supports the improvements to the integrity
reference, see § 192.7) for more detailed selection of performance metrics, the management program.’’ As a result,
information on the listed element.) performance metric data and trends, and NTSB recommended that PG&E:
the decisions that are based in whole or Assess every aspect of your integrity
* * * * * management program, paying particular
(i) A performance plan as outlined in in part on these metrics. Specifically,
the hazardous liquid integrity attention to the areas identified in this
ASME/ANSI B31.8S, section 9 that investigation, and implement a revised
includes performance measures meeting management program requirements are:
§ 195.452(l) What records must be program that includes, at a minimum,
the requirements of § 192.945.
kept? (1) An operator must maintain for * * * * *
§ 192.945 What methods must an operator review during an inspection: (4) an improved self-assessment that
use to measure program effectiveness? * * * * * adequately measures whether the
(a) General. An operator must include (ii) Documents to support the program is effectively assessing and
in its integrity management program decisions and analyses, including any evaluating the integrity of each covered
methods to measure whether the modifications, justifications, variances, pipeline segment. (Recommendation P–
program is effective in assessing and deviations and determinations made, 11–29)
evaluating the integrity of each covered and actions taken, to implement and In this same investigation, NTSB
pipeline segment and in protecting the evaluate each element of the integrity raised some concerns with PHMSA’s
high consequence areas. These measures management program listed in oversight of performance-based safety
must include the four overall paragraph (f) of this section. programs such as integrity management.
performance measures specified in (2) See Appendix C of this part for NTSB concluded that greater focus is
ASME/ANSI B31.8S (incorporated by examples of records an operator would needed on how performance-based
reference, see § 192.7 of this part), be required to keep. safety systems are implemented,
section 9.4, and the specific measures Appendix C further states: executed and evaluated, and whether
for each identified threat specified in § 195.452 Appendix C. VI. Examples problem areas are being detected and
ASME/ANSI B31.8S, Appendix A. An of types of records an operator must corrected. Critical to this overall process
operator must submit the four overall maintain. is the selection of meaningful metrics by
performance measures as part of the * * * * * operators that allow them to quantify,
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 2012 / Notices 72437
understand, and improve their own for gas transmission and hazardous • The use of periodic self-
performance. liquid pipelines, respectively. PHMSA assessments, internal or external audits,
Following its investigation, NTSB will evaluate specific metrics operators management reviews, performance
issued two related recommendations for use to assess program effectiveness and metrics analysis, benchmarking against
enhancing PHMSA’s oversight of how those metrics are used in a process other operators, or other self-critical
operator programs to assess the of continuous improvement. PHMSA evaluations to assess program
effectiveness of PHMSA’s programs will also confirm that operators are effectiveness.
using performance metrics. These maintaining adequate records of their • Clear performance goals and
recommendations are: program effectiveness evaluations and objectives to measure the effectiveness
Revise your integrity management their performance metrics data, as well of key integrity activities.
inspection protocol to: as the activities and decisions • Clear assignment of responsibility
(1) incorporate a review of meaningful associated with all required integrity for implementing required actions.
metrics; management program elements. Our • Review and follow-up of program
(2) require auditors to verify that the inspectors will check to confirm that evaluation results, findings, and
operator has a procedure in place for information and data gaps are recommendations, etc., by appropriate
ensuring the completeness and accuracy aggressively being addressed and that company managers.
of underlying information; assumptions are appropriately based on Operators are also advised that a clear
(3) require auditors to review all location-specific data. and meaningful set of performance
integrity management performance metrics is essential to program
measures reported to the Pipeline and II. Advisory Bulletin (ADB–20l2–10) effectiveness. An effective program for
Hazardous Materials Safety To: Owners and Operators of measuring integrity management
Administration and compare the leak, Hazardous Liquid and Gas Transmission program effectiveness should have the
failure, and incident measures to the Pipeline Systems following characteristics:
operator’s risk model; and Subject: Using Meaningful Metrics in • A description of the type of
(4) require setting performance goals Conducting Integrity Management performance measures to be used, along
for pipeline operators at each audit and Program Evaluations with the data sources, data validation
follow up on those goals at subsequent Advisory: To further enhance and quality assurance activities, the
audits. (Recommendation P–11–18) PHMSA’s safety efforts and as an initial frequency of data collection, and any
(1) Develop and implement standards step in addressing NTSB normalization factors.
for integrity management and other Recommendations P–11–18 and P–11– • A means to update the performance
performance-based safety programs that 19, PHMSA is issuing this Advisory measures (if needed) to assure they are
require operators of all types of pipeline Bulletin concerning operator integrity providing useful information about the
systems to regularly assess the management program evaluation using effectiveness of integrity management
effectiveness of their programs using meaningful metrics. program activities.
clear and meaningful metrics and to A critical program element of an • The use of performance metrics
identify and then correct deficiencies; operator’s integrity management data to check and calibrate the
and (2) make those metrics available in program is the systematic, rigorous operator’s risk analysis tools to assure
a centralized database. evaluation of the program’s these best represent the performance of
(Recommendation P–11–19) effectiveness using clear and meaningful the operator’s specific assets.
These recommendations reinforce the metrics. When executed diligently, this The performance metrics that are
importance of a rigorous evaluation of a self-evaluation process will lead to more required to be reported to PHMSA
company’s integrity management robust and effective integrity annually, such as the number of miles
program in improving performance. management programs and improve of pipeline assessed, number of
Through this Advisory Bulletin, overall safety performance. This process anomalies found requiring repair or
PHMSA is reminding operators of the is critical to achieving a mature integrity mitigation, etc., are a small subset of the
importance of these regulation-required management program and a culture of overall suite of metrics used by an
program elements. Operators should continuous improvement. Program operator to evaluate its program. A
review their current programs for evaluation is a required integrity much larger set of operator-specific
evaluating integrity management management program element as metrics to be used internally is needed
program effectiveness and the established in §§ 192.911(i) and to effectively evaluate an integrity
performance metrics used in these 195.452(k) for gas transmission and management program performance.
programs to be sure they provide a hazardous liquid pipelines, Metrics should be developed for each of
current and accurate representation of respectively. In light of NTSB’s findings the following:
integrity management program following the San Bruno gas • Overall program effectiveness
performance. Further, operators should transmission incident, PHMSA is indicated by the number of releases,
ensure that program improvements and reminding operators about the number of injuries or fatalities, volume
corrective actions identified by these importance of these requirements. released, etc.
evaluations are implemented in a timely Operators are advised to critically • Specific threats that include both
manner. review their processes and methods for leading and lagging indicators for the
As a result of NTSB’s evaluating integrity management important integrity threats on an
recommendations, PHMSA is initiating program performance and take action to operator’s systems. These include:
efforts to strengthen its protocols and strengthen these processes where Æ Activity Measures that monitor the
oversight of these key integrity warranted. An effective operator surveillance and preventive activities
management program elements. performance evaluation process is that are in place to control risk.
Beginning immediately, PHMSA’s expected to have the following Æ Deterioration Measures that
inspections will emphasize reviewing characteristics: monitor operational and maintenance
operator methods for integrity • A well-defined description of the trends to indicate if the program is
management program evaluation as scope, objectives, and frequency of successful or weakening despite the risk
required by § 192.945 and § 195.452(k) program evaluations. control activities in place. (Also
72438 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 5, 2012 / Notices
identified as Operational Measures in information and data gaps throughout The session will be open to the public
ASME B31.8S.) their entire integrity management for approximately 30 minutes at the
Æ Failure Measures that reflect program. start of the meeting for the discussion of
whether the program is effective in Issued in Washington, DC, on November administrative matters and the general
achieving the objective of improving 29, 2012. status of the program. The remaining
integrity. (Also identified as Direct Jeffrey D. Wiese, portion of the meeting will be closed to
Integrity Measures in ASME B31.8S) the public for the Committee’s review,
• Metrics that measure and provide Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2012–29362 Filed 12–4–12; 8:45 am]
discussion, and evaluation of research
insights into how well an operator’s and development applications.
processes associated with the various BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
integrity management program elements During the closed portion of the
are performing. Examples of such meeting, discussions and
processes would include integrity DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS recommendations will deal with
assessment, risk analysis, the AFFAIRS qualifications of personnel conducting
identification of preventive and the studies, staff and consultant
mitigative measures, etc. Clinical Science Research and critiques of research proposals and
While operator-level rollups of Development Service Cooperative similar documents, and the medical
metrics are useful for small operators, a Studies Scientific Evaluation records of patients who are study
robust program for large operators Committee; Notice of Meeting subjects, the disclosure of which would
should also include metrics at a more constitute a clearly unwarranted
granular level. The metrics should The Department of Veterans Affairs invasion of personal privacy. As
enable operators to drill down to gives notice under the Federal Advisory provided by section 10(d) of Public Law
understand the performance of specific Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, that the 92–463, as amended, closing portions of
systems or segments within systems. Clinical Science Research and this meeting is in accordance with 5
This is particularly important for the Development Service Cooperative U.S.C. 552b(c)(6) and (c)(9)(B).
threat-specific metrics mentioned Studies Scientific Evaluation Committee
will hold a meeting on December 13, Those who plan to attend should
previously.
Finally, as required by §§ 195.452(l) 2012, at the Hamilton Crowne Plaza, contact Dr. Grant Huang, Deputy
and 192.947, operators must keep 1001 14th Street NW., Washington, DC. Director, Cooperative Studies Program
records supporting the decisions, The meeting is scheduled to begin at (10P9CS), Department of Veterans
analyses, and processes developed and 8:30 a.m. and end at 4 p.m. Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW.,
used in their evaluation of integrity The Committee advises the Chief Washington, DC 20420, at (202) 443–
management program effectiveness. Research and Development Officer 5700 or by email at grant.huang@va.gov.
These records should include those through the Director of the Clinical By Direction of the Secretary.
justifying the selection of performance Science Research and Development Dated: November 29, 2012.
metrics, the performance metric data Service on the relevance and feasibility
Vivian Drake,
and trends, and how these metrics are of proposed projects and the scientific
used to improve the integrity validity and propriety of technical Committee Management Officer.
management program. Operators should details, including protection of human [FR Doc. 2012–29285 Filed 12–4–12; 8:45 am]
also be diligently working to eliminate subjects. BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
61826 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 197 / Thursday, October 11, 2012 / Notices
passkey.com/Resweb.do?mode= 1. Determine how stakeholders, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

welcome_gi_new&groupID=16450837. including PHMSA, industry, and the Gale by phone at 202–366–0434 or by
Please contact the Hyatt Regency for public use the data. email at john.gale@dot.gov. Information
information on facilities or services for 2. Determine how industry and about PHMSA may be found at http://
individuals with disabilities or to PHMSA currently measure performance, phmsa.dot.gov.
request special assistance during these how performance measures could be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
public meetings. The meeting room will improved, and what additional data is
be posted at the hotel on the days of the needed to do so. I. Background
workshop. 3. Determine the best method(s) for Federal regulations for gas, liquefied
collecting, analyzing, and ensuring natural gas (LNG), and hazardous liquid
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: pipeline facilities require operators to
transparency of additional data needed
Blaine Keener at 202–366–0970 or by have written procedures for responding
to improve performance measures.
email at blaine.keener@dot.gov. to emergencies involving their pipeline
4. Summarize the data PHMSA
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: currently collects, who we collect it facility. The regulations further require
from, and why we collect it. that operators include procedures for
PHMSA will be holding this public
5. Discuss data quality improvement planning with and notifying local
meeting to provide an open forum for
including past efforts and future emergency response and other public
exchanging information about how
opportunities as well as universally officials to ensure a coordinated
pipeline data is used by stakeholders
understood definitions. response. Under 49 CFR §§ 192.605,
and how performance measures could
PHMSA is preparing a document 192.615, 193.2509, and 195.402,
be improved. The NTSB and the DOT
summarizing the pipeline data currently pipeline facility operators must include
Office of the Inspector General have
collected by PHMSA. This document provisions for coordinating with
recommended that PHMSA improve appropriate fire, law enforcement,
pipeline safety performance measures will be available on the registration Web
page by October 22, 2012. All emergency management, and other
and generate meaningful metrics. public safety officials in their
Various stakeholders, including Federal presentations made during the meeting
will be available on the registration Web emergency plans. Immediate contact by
and state regulatory agencies, industry, pipeline facility operators with local
advocacy groups and the media often page a few days after the meeting ends.
emergency responders located in
use data collected by PHMSA and made Jeffrey D. Wiese, potentially affected areas provides for
publicly available to describe the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. appropriate, more coordinated and
reliability of the pipeline infrastructure, [FR Doc. 2012–24976 Filed 10–10–12; 8:45 am] effective response to emergency
portray safety trends, or identify situations involving pipelines, and can
emerging safety concerns. Further, this minimize potential injury, death and
data is often used as part of evaluating environmental damage.
the safety performance of individual DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Under §§ 192.616 and 195.440,
companies, the industry as a whole, and pipeline facility operators must also
the effectiveness of the regulatory Pipeline and Hazardous Materials develop and implement, and sustain a
process. Safety Administration written public education program that
PHMSA regulations require integrity [Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0201] follows the American Petroleum
management program performance Institute’s (API) Recommended Practice
measures for gas distribution pipelines Pipeline Safety: Communication (RP) 1162. Incorporated by reference
(49 CFR 192.1007(e)), gas transmission During Emergency Situations into §§ 192.616 and 195.440, API RP
pipelines (49 CFR 192.945) and 1162 further requires operators to
hazardous liquids pipelines (49 CFR AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous provide notice of, and information
195.452(k)). The information exchanged Materials Safety Administration regarding their emergency response
at this public meeting will help inform (PHMSA); DOT. plans to appropriate local emergency
PHMSA as rulemakings or information ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory officials. These response plans should
collections are considered to improve Bulletin. include information about how
integrity management performance emergency officials can determine
SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing this potential pipeline related risks, and
measures and establish new
performance measures for aspects of Advisory Bulletin to remind operators implement appropriate response plans.
pipeline safety other than integrity of gas, hazardous liquid, and liquefied In addition, on December 11, 2011,
management programs. natural gas pipeline facilities that the National Transportation Safety
operators should immediately and Board (NTSB) issued safety
The keynote speaker will be NTSB directly notify the Public Safety Access recommendations following its
member Mr. Mark Rosekind. Presenters Point (PSAP) that serves the investigation of the September 9, 2010,
will include PHMSA, NAPSR, the communities and jurisdictions in which natural gas pipeline rupture in the city
Pipeline Safety Trust, and those pipelines are located when there of San Bruno, CA. Included in these
representatives from the pipeline are indications of a pipeline facility recommendations was NTSB Safety
industry. As speakers are identified by emergency. Furthermore, operators Recommendation P–11–9, which
name, the agenda on the registration should have the ability to immediately suggested that PHMSA require operators
Web page will be updated. PHMSA contact PSAP(s) along their pipeline of gas and hazardous liquid pipelines
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
invites all stakeholders to actively routes if there is an indication of a ‘‘to ensure that their control room
participate in the meeting and pipeline facility emergency to determine operators immediately and directly
specifically engage in thoughtful input if the PSAP has information which may notify the 9–1–1 emergency call
and discussion during the topic specific help the operator confirm an emergency center(s) for the communities and
breakout session. or to provide assistance and information jurisdiction in which those pipelines are
The overall objectives of the meeting to public safety personnel who may be located when a possible rupture of any
are to: responding to the event. pipeline is indicated.’’ Pipeline facility
VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:03 Oct 10, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11OCN1.SGM 11OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 197 / Thursday, October 11, 2012 / Notices 61827
operators should be proactive in coordinated emergency response. These ADDRESSES: The FACI meeting will be
notifying officials of possible incidents notifications to the PSAP(s) are typically held at the Department of the Treasury,
so that a suitable and timely response made from pipeline facility control in the Cash Room, 1500 Pennsylvania
can be implemented. rooms and dispatch centers; pipeline Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20220.
Finally, PHMSA is publishing this facility operators should ensure the call The meeting will be open to the public.
Advisory Bulletin to reiterate the to the appropriate PSAP is made The meeting will be held in a secured
importance of immediate dialogue promptly, and to as many jurisdictions facility, and members of the public who
between pipeline facility operators and as is necessary. A direct-inbound ten- plan to attend the meeting must contact
PSAP staff when there is any indication digit number must be used for the the Federal Insurance Office (Office), at
of a pipeline rupture or other emergency specific PSAP, since a call to 9–1–1 (202) 622–6910, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time
condition which may have an adverse would be routed only to the PSAP for on Wednesday, November 7, 2012, to
impact on public safety or the the caller’s location. inform the Office of the desire to attend
environment. The local PSAP may have Further, PHMSA believes that the meeting and to provide the
information pertaining to the event that immediate contact and conversation following information which is required
is not available to the pipeline facility should be established between pipeline for entry into the building:
operator. For example, a pipeline facility operators and PSAP staff when —Name
facility operator may be aware of a there is any indication of a pipeline —Organization
sudden pressure drop on their pipeline, rupture or other emergency condition —Date of Birth
but not be able to pinpoint the location which may have a potential adverse —Social Security Number
of a release. The local PSAP may have impact on public safety or the —Country of Citizenship
received 9–1–1 calls concerning a strong environment. PHMSA recommends that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
odor of crude oil or fuel, or of a large pipeline facility operators inquire of the James P. Brown, Senior Policy Advisor
fire, but not be aware a pipeline facility PSAP(s) if there are any other reported to the Federal Insurance Office,
is involved. The early exchange and indicators of possible pipeline Department of the Treasury, 1425 New
coordination of information can benefit emergencies such as odors, unexplained York Avenue NW., Room 2100,
both pipeline facility operators and noises, product releases, explosions, Washington, DC 20005, at (202) 622–
emergency responders so that a more fires, etc., as these reports may not have 6910 (this is not a toll-free number).
rapid and effective response to the event been linked to a possible pipeline Persons who have difficulty hearing or
is achieved. incident by the callers contacting the 9– speaking may access this number via
II. Advisory Bulletin (ADB–2012–09) 1–1 emergency call center. This early TTY by calling the toll-free Federal
coordination will facilitate the timely Relay Service at 800–877–8339.
To: Operators of Gas, Hazardous
and effective implementation of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of
Liquid, and Liquefied Natural Gas
pipeline facility operator’s emergency this meeting is provided in accordance
Pipeline Facilities
Subject: Communication During response plan and coordinated response with the Federal Advisory Committee
Emergency Situations with local public safety officials. Act, 5 U.S.C. App. II, 10(a)(2), through
Advisory: To further enhance the Jeffrey D. Wiese, implementing regulations at 41 CFR
Department’s safety efforts, PHMSA is Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. 102–3.150.
issuing this Advisory Bulletin regarding [FR Doc. 2012–24975 Filed 10–10–12; 8:45 am] Request for Public Comments: FACI is
communication between pipeline BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
seeking public comments on the EU–
facility operators and the PSAP which U.S. Insurance Dialogue Summary
serves the local emergency responders Report (Report) located at: https://
during pipeline facility emergencies in eiopa.europa.eu/consultations/public-
communities along the pipeline route. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY hearings/forthcoming/20121016/
To ensure a prompt, effective, and index.html. FACI will be discussing the
coordinated response to any type of Open Meeting of the Federal Advisory Report at the November 14, 2012
emergency involving a pipeline facility, Committee on Insurance meeting. In addition, the Report will be
pipeline facility operators are required addressed during a public consultation
to maintain an informed relationship AGENCY: Departmental Offices, Treasury. on October 12, 2012 from 2–5 p.m. in
with emergency responders in their ACTION:Notice of Open Meeting; Independence Room F–I, Grand Hyatt
jurisdiction in accordance with Request for Comment. Washington, 1000 H Street NW.,
§§ 192.615, 193.2509 and 195.402. Washington, DC 20001, as part of the
PHMSA reminds pipeline facility SUMMARY: This Notice sets forth the EU–U.S. Dialogue Project. Members of
operators of these requirements and, in proposed topics to be discussed for a the public wishing to comment on the
particular, the need to notify the meeting of the Department of the Report are invited to submit written
PSAP(s), commonly referred to as 9–1– Treasury’s Federal Advisory Committee statements before October 28, 2012, to
1 emergency call centers, or the local on Insurance (FACI). The meeting is the FACI by any of the following
equivalent, of indications of a pipeline open to the public and the site is methods:
facility emergency. Such indications accessible to individuals with
may include an unexpected drop in disabilities. The FACI will convene the Electronic Statements
pressure, unanticipated loss of meeting on Wednesday, November 14, • Send electronic comments to
supervisory control and data acquisition 2012, at the Department of the Treasury,
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
faci@treasury.gov.
communications, or reports from field in the Cash Room, 1500 Pennsylvania
personnel. PHMSA recommends that Avenue NW., Washington, DC, 20220, Paper Statements
pipeline facility operators immediately beginning at 10 a.m. Eastern Time. The • Send paper statements in triplicate
contact the PSAP for the communities meeting will be open to the public. to the Federal Advisory Committee on
and jurisdictions in which those DATES: The meeting will be held on Insurance, Department of the Treasury,
indications occur, to notify local November 14, 2012, commencing at 10 1425 New York Avenue NW., Room
responders and implement a a.m. Eastern Time. 2100, Washington, DC 20005.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:03 Oct 10, 2012 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11OCN1.SGM 11OCN1
48112 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
section 1404 of the Health Care and impose any new operating, Creation Act of 2011 (Pub. L. 112–90)
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 maintenance, or other substantive (the Act) increased the maximum
(HCERA), Public Law 111–152 (124 Stat. requirements on pipeline owners or administrative civil penalties for
1029 (2010)). operators. violation of the pipeline safety laws and
DATES: Persons interested in submitting regulations to $200,000 per violation per
Need for Correction
written comments on the rule day of violation, with a maximum of
As published, REG–112805–10, amendments proposed in this document $2,000,000 for a related series of
contains an error that may prove to be must do so by September 12, 2012. violations. The Act also imposed certain
misleading and is in need of PHMSA will consider comments filed requirements for the conduct of
clarification. after this date so far as practicable. informal administrative enforcement
Correction of Publication ADDRESSES: Comments should reference hearings including, among other things:
Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0102 and convening hearings before a presiding
Accordingly, the publication of the official, an attorney on the staff of the
notice of public hearing on notice of may be submitted in the following ways:
• Web Site: http:// Deputy Chief Counsel; providing an
proposed rulemaking by cross-reference opportunity for a respondent to arrange
to temporary regulations (REG–112805– www.regulations.gov. This site allows
the public to enter comments on any for a hearing transcript; ensuring a
10) which was the subject of FR Doc. separation of functions between agency
Federal Register notice issued by any
2012–19074, is corrected as follows: employees involved with the
On page 46653, column 2, in the agency. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. investigation or prosecution of an
preamble, under the caption ADDRESSES, enforcement case and those involved in
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
line five, the language ‘‘DC 20224. Send • Mail: U.S. Department of deciding the case; and prohibiting ex
Submissions to’’ is corrected to read Transportation (DOT) Docket parte communications. The Act also
‘‘DC 20224. Due to building security Operations Facility (M–30), West provided PHMSA with new
procedures, visitors must enter at the Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., enforcement authority for oil spill
Constitution Avenue entrance. In Washington, DC 20590. response plan compliance under section
addition, all visitors must present photo • Hand Delivery: DOT Docket 4202 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33
identification to enter the building. Operations Facility, West Building, U.S.C. 1321(j)).
Send submissions to’’. Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey In accordance with the Act, PHMSA
LaNita Van Dyke, Avenue SE., Washington, DC, 20590 proposes to: update the administrative
Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., civil penalty maximums and the
Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Monday through Friday, except Federal informal hearing process for pipeline
Counsel, Procedure and Administration. holidays enforcement matters to conform to
[FR Doc. 2012–19730 Filed 8–10–12; 8:45 am] Instructions: Identify the docket current law and to amend other
number, PHMSA–2012–0102, at the administrative procedures used by
beginning of your comments. If you mail PHMSA personnel; amend the criminal
your comments, submit two copies. In enforcement provisions to conform to
order to confirm receipt of your current law and practice; make
comments, include a self-addressed, corrections to the special permit
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials stamped postcard. provisions in the procedures for
Safety Administration Note: All comments are posted adoption of rules; implement the new
electronically in their original form, without enforcement authority for Part 194 oil
49 CFR Parts 190, 192, 193, 195, and changes or edits, including any personal spill response plans; and make certain
199 information. technical amendments and corrections.
The proposed amendments do not
[Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0102] Privacy Act Statement impose any new operating,
RIN 2137–AE29 Anyone can search the electronic maintenance, or other substantive
comments associated with any docket requirements on pipeline owners or
Pipeline Safety: Administrative by the name of the individual operators.
Procedures; Updates and Technical submitting the comment (or signing the
Corrections II. Proposed Amendments to Part 190
comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.). A. Administrative Civil Penalties and
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement the Informal Hearing and Enforcement
Materials Safety Administration
was published in the Federal Register Process
(PHMSA), DOT.
on April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477). Maximum administrative civil
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: penalties. Section 2 of the Pipeline
SUMMARY: This Notice of Proposed James Pates, PHMSA, Office of Chief Safety Act of 2011 increased the
Rulemaking updates the administrative Counsel, 202–366–0331, maximum administrative civil penalties
civil penalty maximums for violation of james.pates@dot.gov; Kristin T.L. for violation of the pipeline safety laws
the pipeline safety regulations to Baldwin, Office of Chief Counsel, 202– and regulations to $200,000 per
conform to current law, updates the 366–6139, kristin.baldwin@dot.gov; or violation per day, with a maximum of
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
informal hearing and adjudication Larry White, PHMSA, Office of Chief $2,000,000 for a related series of
process for pipeline enforcement Counsel, 202–366–9093, violations. PHMSA proposes to amend
matters to conform to current law, lawrence.white@dot.gov. 49 CFR 190.223 to reflect this increase.
amends other administrative procedures SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PHMSA proposes to apply the new
used by PHMSA personnel, and makes administrative civil penalty maximums
other technical corrections and updates I. Purpose and Scope in cases involving violations that occur
to certain administrative procedures. Effective January 3, 2012, the Pipeline or are discovered after January 3, 2012.
The proposed amendments do not Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job The proposed amendment also removes
VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:03 Aug 10, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules 48113
outdated penalty provisions for currently PHMSA’s practice to permit a information, facts, or arguments
violations involving offshore gathering respondent to make arrangements for a involving an issue in the case, but not
lines and liquefied natural gas facilities transcript at the respondent’s cost, this to routine administrative matters, such
and clarifies the applicability of is not explicitly stated in Part 190. as scheduling the hearing or
penalties for violations of the terms of PHMSA proposes to amend § 190.211 to clarification of the enforcement process.
an enforcement order. provide that a respondent may arrange To incorporate this prohibition into
Presiding Official. Section 20(a)(1)(A) for a hearing to be recorded or Part 190, PHMSA proposes to add
of the Act requires PHMSA to issue transcribed at its own cost. PHMSA paragraph (b) to the newly created
regulations requiring hearings further proposes that an accurate copy § 190.210 enjoining any party to an
conducted under 49 U.S.C. chapter 601 of the recording or transcript must be enforcement proceeding (e.g.,
for the issuance of corrective action submitted for the official record. respondent, agency employees serving
orders (CAOs), safety orders, Separation of functions and in an investigative or prosecutorial
compliance orders, and civil penalties prohibition on ex parte capacity, representatives of either party,
to be convened before a presiding communications. Section 20(a)(1)(D) of etc.) from communicating privately with
official. The pipeline enforcement the Act requires PHMSA to issue the decision maker concerning
process found in 49 CFR part 190, used regulations implementing a separation information that is material to the
successfully by PHMSA for many years, of functions between agency employees question to be decided. Notwithstanding
already includes the use of such a involved with the investigation and this addition, parties would be allowed
presiding official for informal hearings. prosecution of an enforcement case and to communicate freely with the
The amendment proposes to codify those involved in deciding the case. presiding official regarding procedural
existing practice. This process provides PHMSA’s current practice is to ensure or administrative issues, such as
pipeline operators with the right to that personnel involved in deciding an scheduling a hearing.
receive notice of any alleged violations enforcement case are not involved in Expedited review of corrective action
identified during an inspection or determining the allegations to be made orders. Section 20(a)(1)(C) of the Act
investigation; to respond to the notice, in that case or preparing the Notice of requires PHMSA to issue regulations
including the opportunity to request an Probable Violation or other type of ensuring ‘‘expedited review’’ of any
informal hearing or otherwise contest enforcement action. On July 12, 2011, CAO issued without prior notice
any alleged violations; to examine the PHMSA explained its separation of pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 60112(e). Section
evidence; to be represented by counsel; functions policy in a statement 20(a)(3) also requires the agency to
to provide any relevant information to published in the Federal Register (76 define the term ‘‘expedited review’’ for
the proposed penalty amount; and to FR 40820). In order to conform Part 190 purposes of this regulation. The
petition for reconsideration of the to the current law and existing agency procedural regulations for issuance of a
agency’s decision. practice, PHMSA proposes to add a new CAO after notice and opportunity for
Although current regulations already § 190.210, titled: ‘‘Separation of hearing are outlined in § 190.233. Under
provide that hearings are held before a functions.’’ Paragraph (a) of the new paragraph (b) of that regulation, PHMSA
presiding official, section 20(a)(2) of the section proposes that an agency may waive the requirement for prior
Act requires that PHMSA issue employee involved in the investigation notice and opportunity for hearing if a
regulations both defining the term or prosecution of an enforcement case failure to do so would result in the
‘‘presiding official’’ and requiring the may not participate in the decision of likelihood of serious harm to life,
presiding official to be an attorney on that case or a factually related case, but property, or the environment. In cases
the staff of the Deputy Chief Counsel may participate as a witness or counsel where an order is issued without prior
who is not engaged in investigative or at a hearing, as set forth in subpart B. notice, paragraph (b) already requires
prosecutorial functions. PHMSA Likewise, paragraph (a) proposes to that an opportunity for a hearing be
proposes to conform to this requirement require that an agency employee who provided to the respondent as soon as
by amending the existing definition of prepares the decision in an enforcement is practicable after issuance of the order.
‘‘presiding official’’ in § 190.3 and by case may not have served in an PHMSA typically schedules hearings
adding a new § 190.212 concerning the investigative or prosecutorial capacity within 10 calendar days, except where
presiding official’s powers and duties. in that case or a factually related case. the respondent requests postponement
The proposed regulations will specify Section 20(a)(1)(E) of the Act requires for good cause.
the powers and duties of the presiding PHMSA to issue regulations prohibiting The current process works well both
official and provide that, if the ex parte communications that are to ensure that an operator has a timely
dedicated presiding official is relevant to the question to be decided in opportunity for a post-order hearing and
unavailable, the Deputy Chief Counsel an enforcement case. An ex parte that PHMSA acts expeditiously to
may delegate the duties of the presiding communication is a communication render a final determination on the
official to another attorney in the Office between a party to a pending case and CAO. Therefore, PHMSA proposes to
of Chief Counsel who has no prior the decision maker regarding an issue in conform paragraph § 190.233(b) to
involvement in the case and who will be that case occurring outside the presence current law by defining the term
supervised by the Deputy Chief of the other parties and without prior ‘‘expedited review’’ for purposes of a
Counsel. PHMSA also proposes to notice and opportunity for all parties to CAO issued without prior notice. In this
amend § 190.211(a) to clarify that this provide comment or rebuttal. In the proposed ‘‘expedited review,’’ the
section applies to any hearing relating to aforementioned July 12, 2011, PHMSA respondent must either request such
civil penalty assessments, compliance policy statement discussed earlier in review by answering the order in
orders, safety orders, or CAOs. this preamble, the agency explained that writing or by requesting a hearing. The
Hearing transcript. Section 20(a)(1)(B) ex parte communications with the Associate Administrator, as soon as
of the Act requires PHMSA to issue presiding official are not permitted by practicable following issuance of the
regulations providing the opportunity the operator, its counsel, or agency staff order, will decide whether the order
for any party requesting a hearing to involved in the investigation and should remain in effect or be
arrange for a transcript of the hearing, at prosecution of the case. This prohibition terminated. Once the determination is
the party’s expense. Although it is applies to all communication regarding issued, the expedited review process is
complete. Issuance of the decision will 8. Amending §§ 190.205, 190.207, amendment, and safety orders. This
occur as soon as is practicable. 190.217, 190.219, 190.221, and 190.223, proposed change clarifies that a
Other amendments to enforcement relating to enforcement actions, to respondent must file a petition to
process. PHMSA also proposes other provide that OPS may take varied exhaust its administrative remedies.
technical amendments and updates to actions under section 4202 of the Oil Additionally, a proposed provision on
improve the clarity and efficiency of the Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. the filing period and the standard of
enforcement regulations and to 1321(j)). judicial review has been included in
otherwise conform to current practice. 9. Amending § 190.211, relating to order to conform to 49 U.S.C. 60119.
These proposed amendments include: hearings, to clarify the manner in which 15. Amending the existing language in
1. Amending § 190.7(a), relating to informal hearings are conducted, § 190.215(a) that is moved to § 190.249
subpoenas and witness fees, to clarify including: A respondent may withdraw to remove the requirement that a
that PHMSA has the authority to issue a hearing request in writing and, if respondent file multiple copies of a
subpoenas for any reason to carry out its permitted by the presiding official, petition; to allow 30, rather than 20,
duties at any time, both during the supplement the record with a written calendar days from receipt of service of
investigative phase of an enforcement submission in lieu of a hearing; a a final order to file a petition for
action and pursuant to a hearing. respondent must submit the material it reconsideration; and to indicate that all
2. Amending § 190.11(a)(1), relating to intends to use to rebut the allegation of petitions must be filed with the
the availability of informal guidance on violation at least 10 calendar days prior Associate Administrator, with a copy to
the pipeline safety regulations, to to the date of the hearing; the hearing is the Office of Chief Counsel.
remove the requirement that ‘‘All conducted informally; OPS, as well as 16. Amending § 190.219, relating to
messages will receive a response by the the respondent, may present evidence consent orders, to expand this section to
following business day,’’ since the and call witnesses at a hearing; and both provide that consent orders may also be
Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) is not parties may request permission to used to resolve CAOs and safety orders.
always able to provide telephonic submit additional documents after the 17. Amend §§ 190.223(b) and
guidance or interpretive assistance on hearing. 190.229(b), relating to civil and criminal
pipeline regulations by the following 10. Amending § 190.211(c) to provide penalties, to remove obsolete civil and
business day. that all hearings in civil penalty cases criminal penalty provisions for
3. Amending § 190.11(a) to revise under $25,000 (currently $10,000) will violations involving offshore gathering
paragraph (a)(1) and remove paragraph be held by telephone conference, unless lines.
(a)(2) to reflect the current practice on either party requests an in-person 18. Amending § 190.225(a), relating to
obtaining telephonic and internet hearing. This proposed change civil penalty assessment considerations,
assistance from OPS. recognizes the increase in the size of to remove paragraph (a)(4) relating to
4. Amending § 190.11(b) to remove civil penalty assessments generally and ‘‘ability to pay’’ as a penalty assessment
paragraph (b)(2) to reflect the current minimizes travel expense for both factor, to conform to the Act.
practice on obtaining written parties. The presiding official will also 19. Amending § 190.233(b) and (c),
interpretations from OPS. have the flexibility to order a video relating to CAOs, to provide an
5. Amending § 190.201, relating to the conference in addition to a telephonic expedited process for setting hearings
purpose and scope of subpart B, to hearing. and issuing decisions on CAOs and
clarify that these enforcement 11. Amending § 190.211(d) to clarify notices of proposed CAOs. This
procedures encompass the enforcement that all evidentiary material on which proposal also includes an expedited
of 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq., section 4202 OPS intends to rely at a hearing, to the process for handling petitions for
of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 extent possible, must be provided at reconsideration to challenge CAOs, to
U.S.C. 1321(j)), and any PHMSA respondent’s request prior to a hearing conform to the Act.
regulation or order issued thereunder. in order to ensure the respondent’s full
6. Amending § 190.203(c), relating to access to the evidentiary record upon B. Criminal Enforcement
inspections and investigations, to clarify which final orders are based. PHMSA proposes to amend the
that an OPS request for specific 12. Amending § 190.213(b), relating to criminal enforcement provisions as
information to an owner or operator final orders, to clarify that the presiding follows:
may be issued at any time and is not official in a § 190.211 hearing case or an 1. Relocating the criminal
limited to a request following an attorney from the Office of Chief enforcement sections to a new ‘‘Subpart
inspection. Counsel in a non-hearing case provides C—Criminal Enforcement.’’
7. Amending § 190.203(e) to provide a recommended decision to the 2. Amending the language in existing
that if a representative of DOT Associate Administrator proposing § 190.229 that is moved to § 190.291,
investigates an accident or incident findings on all material issues. relating to criminal penalties, to remove
involving a pipeline facility, the owner 13. Amending § 190.213(d) and (e) to outdated maximum criminal penalty
or operator of the facility must provide remove the provision that an operator amounts for each criminal offense and
all records and information pertaining may file a judicial appeal of a final order insert ‘‘fined under Title 18’’ to conform
to the accident or incident to a without first filing a petition for to current 49 U.S.C. 60123.
representative of DOT, including reconsideration. This proposed change
integrity management plans and test will ensure that the parties have an C. Procedures for Adoption of Rules
results. Pursuant to this proposed administrative opportunity to correct PHMSA proposes to amend the
change, the owner or operator of the errors prior to the filing of a judicial procedures for the adoption of rules
facility would be required to provide all appeal. provisions as follows:
reasonable assistance in the 14. Amending § 190.215, relating to 1. Redesignating current Subpart C,
investigation of the accident or incident. petitions for reconsideration, by moving Procedures for Adoption of Rules, as
Civil penalties may be assessed for the language in this section to § 190.249 Subpart D.
obstructing an OPS inspection or at the end of subpart B and expanding 2. Amending § 190.207(a), relating to
investigation, in accordance with its scope to cover all final orders, Notices of Probable Violation (NOPV),
section 2 of the Act. corrective action orders, notices of to clarify that a NOPV may be issued for
violation of a special permit, as a special a proposed civil penalty, such action to change the reference to § 190.237 to
permit is an agency order that is serves to close only that particular § 190.206.
enforceable through a NOPV. allegation of violation and not the entire
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
3. Amending § 190.239 to include a case.
process for filing petitions for 10. Amending § 190.209(a) to clarify A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This
reconsideration on safety orders. that in responding to a NOPV, an Rulemaking
4. Amending § 190.337 to remove operator may contest it in writing
This notice of proposed rulemaking is
paragraph (b), relating to the without requesting an in-person
published under the authority of the
reconsideration of petitions for hearing.
Federal Pipeline Safety Law (49 U.S.C.
rulemaking, to remove the target times 11. Amending § 190.209(c) to correct
60101 et seq.). Section 60102 authorizes
for the Associate Administrator to act on a typographical error by changing the
the Secretary of Transportation to issue
petitions for reconsideration, to conform reference from paragraph (c) to
regulations governing design,
to actual practice. paragraph (b).
5. Amending § 190.341, relating to 12. Amending language in existing installation, inspection, emergency
special permits, to clarify that PHMSA § 190.215(a), which is moved to plans and procedures, testing,
may issue a NOPV for violations of a § 190.249, to clarify that a petition for construction, extension, operation,
special permit. reconsideration must include an replacement, and maintenance of
explanation as to why the final order pipeline facilities. Section 60102(l) of
D. Technical Amendments and the Federal Pipeline Safety Law states
should be reconsidered, rather than an
Corrections that the Secretary shall, to the extent
explanation of why the ‘‘effectiveness’’
PHMSA proposes to make the of the final order should be stayed. appropriate and practicable, update
following technical amendments and 13. Amending § 190.223(a) to clarify incorporated industry standards that
corrections to Part 190: that the term ‘‘civil penalty’’ refers to have been adopted as part of the Federal
1. Amending Part 190 to remove all ‘‘administrative’’ civil penalties. pipeline safety regulations.
references to 49 U.S.C. 5101, to update 14. Amending § 190.227(a), relating to B. Executive Order 12866, Executive
Web sites addresses, telephone the payment of penalties, to allow Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory
numbers, and postal addresses, and to payment of penalties under $10,000 to Policies and Procedures
eliminate other incorrect references. be made via ‘‘www.pay.gov’’ and to
2. Amending Part 190 to remove the provide the correct address. This proposed rule is not considered
term ‘‘PHMSA’’ from the phrases 15. Amending §§ 190.233 to clarify a significant regulatory action under
‘‘Administrator, PHMSA’’ and ‘‘Chief that CAOs are based upon a Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
Counsel, PHMSA’’ throughout Part 190 determination that a particular facility and, therefore, is not subject to review
and remove the term ‘‘OPS’’ from the ‘‘is or would be hazardous,’’ which by the Office of Management and
phrase ‘‘Associate Administrator, OPS.’’ tracks the statutory language in 49 Budget. This proposed rule is not
3. Amending § 190.3 to define the U.S.C. 60112, and to clarify that the significant under DOT Regulatory
terms ‘‘Associate Administrator,’’ ‘‘Chief closure of a CAO ‘‘terminates’’ it, as Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034;
Counsel,’’ ‘‘Day,’’ and ‘‘Operator.’’ opposed to ‘‘rescinding’’ it. Feb. 26, 1979). Executive Orders 12866
4. Amending § 190.7(d) to harmonize 16. Amending §§ 190.239 and 190.341 and 13563 require agencies to regulate
the service of subpoenas with the to italicize the questions at the in the most cost effective manner, to
service of other documents under beginning of each lettered paragraph. make a reasoned determination that the
§ 190.5 to reflect that service by hand, 17. Amending § 190.319, relating to benefits of the intended regulation
certified mail, or registered mail is extensions of time for rulemaking justify its costs, and to develop
complete upon mailing. comment periods, to clarify that regulations that impose the least burden
5. Amending § 190.203(b)(6) and other petitions for extensions of time to file on society. As this proposed rule
sections to eliminate the exclusive use comments must be addressed to involves agency practice and procedure,
of the masculine pronouns ‘‘him’’ and PHMSA, as provided in § 190.309. proposes to conform agency procedural
‘‘his’’ or to define the term to include 18. Amending § 190.321, relating to requirements to current public law, and
both masculine and feminine. the contents of written comments, to does not recommend imposing any new
6. Amending § 190.205 to clarify that remove the requirement to submit substantive requirements on operators
the Associate Administrator or his or multiple copies of a rulemaking or the public, it has no significant
her designee(s) issue warning letters and comment. economic impact on regulated entities.
that an operator may respond to a 19. Amending § 190.327(b), relating to C. Executive Order 13132
warning letter. hearings on proposed rulemakings, to
7. Amending § 190.207(a) to clarify clarify that procedures for rulemaking This proposed rule has been analyzed
that a NOPV may contain a combination hearings do not apply to other types of in accordance with the principles and
of warning items, allegations of hearings by deleting the phrase ‘‘under criteria contained in Executive Order
violation, proposed civil penalties, and this part’’ and inserting ‘‘under this 13132 (‘‘Federalism’’). This proposed
proposed compliance orders for a subpart.’’ rule does not introduce any regulation
probable violation of section 4202 of the 20. Amending § 190.335(a) and that: (1) Has substantial direct effects on
Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. removing § 190.338(c), relating to the the states, the relationship between the
1321(j)). reconsideration of petitions for national government and the states, or
8. Amending § 190.207(c) to clarify rulemaking and appeals, to remove the the distribution of power and
that the Associate Administrator or his requirement to submit multiple copies responsibilities among the various
or her designee(s) may amend a NOPV of each. levels of government; (2) imposes
but must provide an additional 21. For administrative purposes, substantial direct compliance costs on
opportunity for response. §§ 190.241, 190.243, 190.245, and state and local governments; or (3)
9. Amending § 190.209(a)(1), relating 190.247 are added and reserved. preempts state law. Therefore, the
to response options to NOPVs, to clarify 22. Amending §§ 192.603(c), consultation and funding requirements
that if an operator responds by paying 193.2017(b), 195.402(b), and 199.101(b) of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
Further, this proposed rule does not there are no significant environmental § 190.3 Definitions.
have an impact on federalism that impacts associated with this rule. * * * * *
warrants preparation of a federalism Associate Administrator means the
List of Subjects
assessment. Associate Administrator for Pipeline
49 CFR Part 190 Safety.
D. Executive Order 13175 Chief Counsel means the Chief
This proposed rule has been analyzed Administrative Practice and Counsel of the PHMSA.
in accordance with the principles and procedure; Penalties. Day means a 24-hour period ending at
criteria contained in Executive Order 49 CFR Part 192 11:59 p.m.
13175 (‘‘Consultation and Coordination * * * * *
with Indian Tribal Governments’’). This Pipeline safety, Fire Prevention,
Operator means any or all of the
proposed rule does not significantly or Security measures.
owners or operators.
uniquely affect the communities of the 49 CFR Part 193 * * * * *
Indian tribal governments; therefore, the Presiding official means the person
Pipeline safety, Fire prevention,
funding and consultation requirements who conducts any hearing relating to
Security measures.
of Executive Order 13175 do not apply. civil penalty assessments, compliance
49 CFR Part 195 orders, safety orders, or corrective
E. Executive Order 13211
Ammonia, Carbon dioxide, action orders and who has the duties
This proposed rule is not a significant and powers set forth in § 190.212.
energy action under Executive Order Incorporation by reference, Petroleum,
Pipeline safety, Reporting and * * * * *
13211. It is not a significant regulatory 8. In § 190.7, paragraphs (a) and (d)
action under Executive Order 12866 and recordkeeping requirements.
are revised to read as follows:
is not likely to have a significant, 49 CFR Part 199
adverse effect on the supply, § 190.7 Subpoenas; witness fees.
distribution, or use of energy. Drug testing, alcohol misuse. (a) The Administrator, the Chief
Furthermore, this proposed rule has not For the reasons discussed in the Counsel, or an official designated by the
been designated by the Administrator of preamble, PHMSA proposes to amend Administrator may sign and issue
the Office of Information and Regulatory 49 CFR Subchapter C as follows: subpoenas individually on his or her
Affairs as a significant energy action. own initiative at any time. Such times
PART 190—PIPELINE SAFETY may include during an inspection or
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act PROGRAMS AND RULEMAKING investigation or, upon request and
As this proposed rule updates the Part PROCEDURES adequate showing by a participant to an
190 procedures in accordance with 1. The authority citation for part 190 enforcement proceeding, that the
current public law and will have no is revised to read as follows: information sought will materially
direct or indirect economic impacts for advance the proceeding.
government units, businesses, or other Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(b); 49 U.S.C.
60101 et seq.; 49 CFR 1.53.
* * * * *
organizations, I certify that this (d) Service of a subpoena upon the
proposed rule will not have a significant person named in the subpoena is
PART 190—[AMENDED]
economic impact on a substantial achieved by delivering a copy of the
number of small entities. 2. Part 190 is amended by revising the subpoena to the person and by paying
G. Paperwork Reduction Act title to read: the fees for one day’s attendance and
mileage as specified by paragraph (g) of
This proposed rule contains no new PART 190—PIPELINE SAFETY this section. Service of a subpoena can
information collection requirements or ENFORCEMENT AND REGULATORY also be made by certified or registered
additional paperwork burdens. PROCEDURES. mail to the person at the last known
Therefore, submitting an analysis of the address. Service is complete upon
burdens to OMB pursuant to the PART 190—[AMENDED] mailing. When a subpoena is issued at
Paperwork Reduction Act is the instance of any officer or agency of
unnecessary. 3. In part 190, revise all references to
the United States, fees and mileage need
‘‘Associate Administrator, PHMSA’’ to not be tendered at the time of service.
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act read ‘‘Associate Administrator’’. Delivery of a copy of a subpoena and
This proposed rule does not impose 4. In part 190, revise all references to tender of the fees to a natural person
unfunded mandates under the ‘‘Chief Counsel, PHMSA’’ to read ‘‘Chief may be made by handing them to the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of Counsel’’. person, leaving them at the person’s
1995. It does not result in costs of $100 5. In part 190, revise all references to office with a person in charge, leaving
million or more, as adjusted for ‘‘Associate Administrator, OPS’’ to read them at the person’s residence with a
inflation, to either state, local or tribal ‘‘Associate Administrator’’. person of suitable age and discretion
governments, in the aggregate, or to the residing there, or by any method
§ 190.1 [Amended]
private sector, and is the least whereby actual notice is given to the
burdensome alternative that achieves 6. In § 190.1, paragraph (a) is person and the fees are made available
the objective of the rule. amended by removing the phrase ‘‘and
prior to the return date.

49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq. (the hazardous
I. Environmental Assessment * * * * *
material transportation laws)’’.
9. In § 190.11, paragraphs (a) and (b)
As this proposed rule amends agency 7. In § 190.3, the definition of are revised to read as follows:
administrative practice and procedure ‘‘Presiding Official’’ is revised and the
and does not impose any new new definitions for ‘‘Associate § 190.11 Availability of informal guidance
substantive environmental requirements Administrator,’’ ‘‘Chief Counsel,’’ and interpretive assistance.
on operators or the public or change the ‘‘Day,’’ and ‘‘Operator’’ are added in (a) Availability of telephonic and
environmental status quo in any way, alphabetical order to read as follows: Internet assistance. PHMSA has
established a Web site and a telephone information within a period specified by 30 days after receipt of the notice to
line to OPS headquarters where the Associate Administrator, but no submit written comments, revised
information on and advice about later than 30 days from the time the procedures, or request a hearing. After
compliance with the pipeline safety notification is received by the operator. considering all material presented in
regulations specified in 49 CFR parts The notification must provide a writing or at the hearing if applicable,
190–199 is available. The Web site and reasonable description of the specific the Associate Administrator determines
telephone line are staffed by personnel information required. whether the plans or procedures are
from PHMSA’s OPS from 9:00 a.m. * * * * * inadequate as alleged and orders the
through 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time, (e) If a representative of the U.S. required amendment if they are
Monday through Friday, with the Department of Transportation inspects inadequate, or withdraws the notice if
exception of Federal holidays. When the or investigates an incident involving a they are not. In determining the
lines are not staffed, individuals may pipeline facility, the operator must adequacy of an operator’s plans or
leave a recorded voicemail message or make available to the representative all procedures, the Associate Administrator
post a message on the OPS Web site. records and information that pertain to may consider:
The telephone number for the OPS the incident in any way, including (1) Relevant available pipeline safety
information line is (202) 366–4595 and integrity management plans and test data;
the OPS Web site can be accessed via results. The operator must provide all (2) Whether the plans or procedures
the Internet at http://phmsa.dot.gov/ reasonable assistance in the are appropriate for the particular type of
pipeline investigation. Any person who obstructs pipeline transportation or facility, and
(b) Availability of written an inspection or investigation by taking for the location of the facility;
interpretations. A written regulatory actions that were known or reasonably (3) The reasonableness of the plans or
interpretation, response to a question, or should have been known to prevent, procedures; and
an opinion concerning a pipeline safety hinder, or impede an investigation (4) The extent to which the plans or
issue may be obtained by submitting a without good cause will be subject to procedures contribute to public safety.
written request to the Office of Pipeline administrative civil penalties under this (b) The amendment of an operator’s
Safety (PHP–30), PHMSA, U.S. subpart. plans or procedures prescribed in
Department of Transportation, 1200 (f) When OPS determines that the paragraph (a) of this section is in
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, information obtained from an inspection addition to, and may be used in
DC 20590–0001. The requestor must or from other appropriate sources conjunction with, the appropriate
include his or her return address and warrants further action, OPS may enforcement actions prescribed in this
should also include a daytime telephone initiate one or more of the enforcement subpart.
number. Written requests should be proceedings prescribed in this subpart. 14. In § 190.207, paragraphs (a) and
submitted at least 120 days before the 12. Section 190.205 is revised to read (c) are revised to read as follows:
time the requestor needs a response. as follows: § 190.207 Notice of probable violation.
* * * * * (a) Except as otherwise provided by
10. In § 190.201, paragraph (a) is § 190.205 Warning letters.
Upon determining that a probable this subpart, a Regional Director begins
revised to read as follows:
violation of 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq., an enforcement proceeding by serving a
§ 190.201 Purpose and scope. section 4202 of the Oil Pollution Act of notice of probable violation on a person
(a) This subpart describes the 1990 (33 U.S.C. 1321(j)), or any and charging that person with a
enforcement authority and sanctions regulation or order issued thereunder probable violation of 49 U.S.C. 60101 et
exercised by the Associate has occurred, the Associate seq., section 4202 of the Oil Pollution
Administrator for achieving and Administrator or his or her designee(s) Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 1321(j)), or any
maintaining pipeline safety and may issue a Warning Letter notifying the regulation or order issued thereunder.
compliance under 49 U.S.C. 60101 et owner or operator of the probable * * * * *
seq., section 4202 of the Oil Pollution violation and advising the owner or (c) The Regional Director may amend
Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 1321(j)), and any operator to correct it or be subject to a notice of probable violation at any
PHMSA regulation or order issued potential enforcement action under this time prior to issuance of a final order
thereunder. It also prescribes the subpart. The owner or operator may under § 190.213. If an amendment
procedures governing the exercise of submit a response to the Warning Letter includes any new material allegations of
that authority and the imposition of but is not required to. fact, proposes an increased civil penalty
those sanctions. 13. Add § 190.206 to subpart B to read amount, or proposes new or additional
* * * * * as follows: remedial action under § 190.217, the
11. In § 190.203, paragraph (b)(6) and respondent will have the opportunity to
§ 190.206 Amendment of plans or respond under § 190.209.
paragraphs (c), (e), and (f) are revised to procedures.
read as follows: 15. In § 190.209, paragraphs (a) and
(a) A Regional Director begins a (c) are revised to read as follows:
§ 190.203 Inspections and investigations. proceeding to determine whether an
* * * * * operator’s plans or procedures required § 190.209 Response options.
(b) * * * under parts 192, 193, 194, 195, and 199 (a) When the notice contains a
(6) Whenever deemed appropriate by of this subchapter are inadequate to proposed civil penalty—
the Associate Administrator, or his or assure safe operation of a pipeline (1) If respondent is not contesting an
her designee. facility by issuing a notice of allegation of probable violation, pay the
(c) If the Associate Administrator amendment. The notice will specify the proposed civil penalty as provided in
believes that further information is alleged inadequacies and the proposed § 190.227 and advise the Regional
needed to determine appropriate action, action for revision of the plans or Director of the payment. The payment
the Associate Administrator may notify procedures and provide an opportunity authorizes PHMSA to make a finding of
the pipeline operator in writing that the for a hearing under § 190.211 of this violation as to the uncontested item(s),
operator is required to provide specific Part. The notice will allow the operator with prejudice to the respondent;
(2) If respondent is not contesting an § 190.211 Hearings. course of the hearing and gives each
allegation of probable violation but (a) General. This section applies to party an opportunity to offer facts,
wishes to submit a written explanation, hearings conducted under this part statements, explanation, documents,
information or other materials relating to civil penalty assessments, testimony or other items that are
respondent believes may warrant compliance orders, safety orders, and relevant and material to the issues
mitigation or elimination of the corrective action orders. A presiding under consideration. The parties may
proposed civil penalty, respondent may official will convene all hearings call witnesses on their own behalf and
submit such materials. This authorizes conducted under this section. examine the evidence and witnesses
PHMSA to make a finding of violation (b) Hearing request and statement of presented by the other party. After the
and to issue a final order under issues. A request for a hearing provided evidence in the case has been presented,
§ 190.213; for in this part must be accompanied by the presiding official may permit
(3) If respondent is contesting one or a statement of the issues that the discussion on the issues under
more allegations of probable violation respondent intends to raise at the consideration.
but is not requesting a hearing under hearing. The issues may relate to the (g) Transcript. PHMSA does not
§ 190.211, respondent may submit a allegations in the notice, the proposed prepare a detailed record of the hearing.
written response in answer to the corrective action, or the proposed civil The respondent may arrange for the
allegations; or penalty amount. A respondent’s failure hearing to be recorded or transcribed at
to specify an issue may result in waiver cost to the respondent, provided the
(4) The respondent may request a
of the respondent’s right to raise that respondent submits an accurate copy of
hearing under § 190.211.
issue at the hearing. The respondent’s the recording or transcript for the
* * * * * request must also indicate whether or official record.
(c) Failure of the respondent to not the respondent will be represented (h) Post-hearing submission. The
respond in accordance with paragraph by counsel at the hearing. A respondent respondent and OPS may request an
(a) of this section or, when applicable, may withdraw a hearing request in opportunity to submit further written
paragraph (b) of this section, constitutes writing and, if permitted by the
material after the hearing for inclusion
a waiver of the right to contest the presiding official, supplement the
in the record. The presiding official will
allegations in the notice of probable record with a written submission in lieu
allow a reasonable time for the
violation and authorizes the Associate of a hearing.
(c) Telephonic and in-person submission of the material and will
Administrator, without further notice to
hearings. A telephone hearing will be specify the submission date. If the
the respondent, to find the facts as
held if the amount of the proposed civil material is not submitted within the
alleged in the notice of probable
penalty or the cost of the proposed time prescribed, the case will proceed to
violation and to issue a final order
corrective action is less than $25,000, final action without the material.
under § 190.213.
unless the respondent or OPS submits a (i) Preparation of decision. After
* * * * * submission of all materials during and
16. Add § 190.210 to subpart B to read written request for an in-person hearing.
In-person hearings will normally be after the hearing, the presiding official
as follows: prepares a recommended decision in the
held at the office of the appropriate
§ 190.210 Separation of functions. PHMSA Region. Hearings may be held case. This recommended decision, along
by video teleconference if the necessary with any material submitted during and
(a) General An agency employee who after the hearing, will be included in the
assists in the investigation or equipment is available to all parties.
(d) Request for evidentiary material. record which is forwarded to the
prosecution of an enforcement case may Associate Administrator for issuance of
Upon request, to the extent practicable,
not participate in the decision of that a decision and order.
OPS will provide to the respondent in
case or a factually related one, but may 18. Add § 190.212 to subpart B to read
advance of the hearing all evidentiary
participate as a witness or counsel at a as follows:
material upon which OPS intends to
hearing, as set forth in this subpart.
rely or to introduce at the hearing that
Likewise, an agency employee who is pertinent to the issues to be § 190.212 Presiding official, powers, and
prepares a decision in an enforcement determined. The respondent may
duties.
case may not have served in an respond to or rebut this material at the (a) General. The presiding official for
investigative or prosecutorial capacity hearing as set forth in this section. a hearing conducted under § 190.211 is
in that case or a factually related one. (e) Pre-hearing submission. an attorney on the staff of the Deputy
(b) Prohibition on ex parte Respondent must submit all records, Chief Counsel who is not engaged in
communications. A party to an documentation, and other written any investigative or prosecutorial
enforcement proceeding, including a evidence it intends to use to rebut an functions, such as the issuance of a
respondent, its representative, or an allegation of violation at least 10 notice under this subpart. If the
agency employee having served in an calendar days prior to the date of the designated presiding official is
investigative or prosecutorial capacity hearing, unless another deadline is unavailable, the Deputy Chief Counsel
in the proceeding, may not ordered by the presiding official. Failure may delegate the powers and duties
communicate privately with the to submit the material in advance of the specified in this section to another
Associate Administrator or presiding hearing in accordance with this attorney in the Office of Chief Counsel
official concerning information that is paragraph will waive the respondent’s with no prior involvement in the matter
material to the question to be decided in right to introduce the material at the to be heard who will serve as the
the proceeding. A party may hearing, unless the presiding official presiding official.
communicate, however, with the finds there is good cause for not timely (b) Time and place of the hearing. The
presiding official regarding certain submitting the materials. presiding official will set the date, time
administrative or procedural issues, (f) Conduct of the hearing. The and location of the hearing. To the
such as for scheduling a hearing. hearing is conducted informally without extent practicable, the presiding official
17. Section 190.211 is revised to read strict adherence to rules of evidence. will accommodate the parties’ schedules
as follows: The presiding official regulates the when setting the hearing. Reasonable
notice of the hearing will be provided to to determine the nature and extent of violation of any provision of 49 U.S.C.
all parties. the violations and to issue an order 60101 et seq. or any regulation issued
(c) Powers and duties of presiding directing compliance. thereunder resulting in an order being
official. The presiding official will 22. In § 190.219, paragraph (a) is issued under §§ 190.217, 190.219 or
conduct a fair and impartial hearing and revised and paragraph (c) is added to 190.233 and a violation of the
take all action necessary to avoid delay read as follows: requirements of such an order if both
in the disposition of the proceeding and violations are based on the same act,
§ 190.219 Consent order.
maintain order. The presiding official except that failure to comply with the
has all powers necessary to achieve (a) At any time prior to the issuance terms of such orders constitutes a
those ends, including, but not limited to of a compliance order under § 190.217, different act.
the power to: a corrective action order under 25. In § 190.225, paragraphs (a)(1),
(1) Regulate the course of the hearing § 190.233, or a safety order under (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4) and (a)(5) are revised
and conduct of the parties and their § 190.239, the Associate Administrator to read as follows:
counsel; and the respondent may agree to
(2) Receive evidence and inquire into dispose of the case by execution of a § 190.225 Assessment considerations.
the relevant and material facts consent agreement and order which may * * * * *
concerning the matters that are subject be jointly executed. Upon execution, the (a) The Associate Administrator shall
of the hearing; consent order is considered a final order consider:
(3) Require the submission of under § 190.213. (1) The nature, circumstances and
documents and other information; * * * * * gravity of the violation, including
(4) Direct that documents or briefs (c) The proposed execution of a adverse impact on the environment;
relate to issues raised during the course consent agreement and order arising out (2) The degree of the respondent’s
of the hearing; of a corrective action order under culpability;
(5) Fix the time for filing documents, § 190.233 will comply with the (3) The respondent’s history of prior
briefs, and other items; notification procedures set forth in 49 offenses;
(6) Prepare a recommended decision; U.S.C. 60112(c). (4) Any good faith by the respondent
and 23. Section 190.221 is revised to read in attempting to achieve compliance;
(7) Exercise such other authority as is as follows: (5) The effect on the respondent’s
necessary to carry out the ability to continue in business; and
§ 190.221 Civil penalties generally.
responsibilities of the presiding official * * * * *
under this subpart. When the Associate Administrator 26. In § 190.227, paragraph (a) is
19. Section 190.213 is amended by has reason to believe that a person has revised to read as follows:
revising paragraph (b)(5), adding committed an act violating 49 U.S.C.
60101 et seq., section 4202 of the Oil § 190.227 Payment of penalty.
paragraph (b)(6) and removing
paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows: Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. (a) Except for payments exceeding
1321(j)), or any regulation or order $10,000, payment of a civil penalty
§ 190.213 Final order. issued thereunder, proceedings under proposed or assessed under this subpart
* * * * * §§ 190.207 through 190.213 may be may be made by certified check or
(b) * * * conducted to determine the nature and money order (containing the CPF
(5) In cases involving a § 190.211 extent of the violations and to assess Number for the case), payable to ‘‘U.S.
hearing, any material submitted during and, if appropriate, compromise a civil Department of Transportation,’’ to the
and after the hearing; and penalty. Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
(6) The recommended decision 24. Section 190.223 is revised to read Monroney Aeronautical Center,
prepared by the presiding official in as follows: Financial Operations Division (AMZ–
cases involving a § 190.211 hearing, or 341), P.O. Box 25770, Oklahoma City,
§ 190.223 Maximum penalties.
prepared by an attorney from the Office OK 73125, by wire transfer through the
of Chief Counsel in cases not involving (a) Any person who is determined to Federal Reserve Communications
a hearing, containing proposed findings have violated a provision of 49 U.S.C. System (Fedwire) to the account of the
and determinations on all material 60101 et seq. section 4202 of the Oil U.S. Treasury, or via ‘‘www.pay.gov.’’
issues. Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. Payments exceeding $10,000 must be
(c) * * * 1321(j)), or any regulation or order made by wire transfer.
issued thereunder after January 3, 2012,
§ 190.215 [Removed and Reserved] is subject to an administrative civil * * * * *
20. Remove and reserve § 190.215. penalty not to exceed $200,000 for each § 190.229 [Removed and Reserved]
21. Section 190.217 is revised to read violation for each day the violation 27. Remove and reserve § 190.229.
as follows: continues, except that the maximum
administrative civil penalty may not § 190.231 [Removed and Reserved]
§ 190.217 Compliance orders generally. exceed $2,000,000 for any related series 28. Remove and reserve § 190.231.
When the Associate Administrator of violations. 29. In § 190.233, paragraphs (a), (b),
has reason to believe that a person is (b) Any person who is determined to (c)(3), (c)(4), (f)(1), and (g) are revised to
engaging in conduct that violates 49 have violated any standard or order read as follows:
U.S.C. 60101 et seq., section 4202 of the under 49 U.S.C. 60129 shall be subject
Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. to a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000, § 190.233 Corrective action orders.
1321(j)), or any regulation or order which shall be in addition to any other (a) Except as provided by paragraph
issued thereunder, and if the nature of penalties to which such person may be (b) of this section, if the Associate
the violation and the public interest subject under paragraph (a) of this Administrator finds, after reasonable
warrant, the Associate Administrator section. notice and opportunity for hearing in
may conduct proceedings under (c) No person will be subject to a civil accord with paragraph (c) of this section
§§ 190.207 through 190.213 of this part penalty under this section for the and § 190.211, a particular pipeline
facility is or would be hazardous to life, operator in writing by service as procedures under § 190.206, or a safety
property, or the environment, the prescribed in § 190.5. order under § 190.239. The petition
Associate Administrator may issue an * * * * * must be received no later than 30 days
order pursuant to this section requiring (f) * * * after service of the order upon the
the owner or operator of the facility to (1) A finding that the pipeline facility respondent and a copy must be
take corrective action. Corrective action is or would be hazardous to life, provided to the Office of Chief Counsel.
may include suspended or restricted use property, or the environment. Petitions received after that time will
of the facility, physical inspection, * * * * * not be considered. The petition must
testing, repair, replacement, or other (g) The Associate Administrator will contain a brief statement of the
appropriate action. terminate a corrective action order complaint and an explanation as to why
(b) The Associate Administrator may whenever the Associate Administrator the order should be reconsidered.
waive the requirement for notice and determines that the facility is no longer (b) If the respondent requests the
opportunity for hearing under paragraph hazardous to life, property, or the consideration of additional facts or
(a) of this section before issuing an order environment. If appropriate, however, a arguments, the respondent must submit
whenever the Associate Administrator notice of probable violation may be the reasons they were not presented
determines that the failure to do so issued under § 190.207. prior to issuance of the final order.
would result in the likelihood of serious * * * * * (c) The Associate Administrator does
harm to life, property, or the not consider repetitious information,
environment. When an order is issued § 190.237 [Removed and Reserved] arguments, or petitions.
under this paragraph, a respondent that 30. Remove and reserve § 190.237. (d) The filing of a petition under this
elects to contest the order may obtain 31. Section 190.239 is amended by section stays the payment of any civil
expedited review of the order either by revising the heading of paragraphs (a), penalty assessed. However, unless the
answering in writing to the order or (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f), and adding Associate Administrator, OPS otherwise
requesting a § 190.211 hearing to be paragraph (g) to read as follows: provides, the order, including any
held as soon as practicable in required corrective action, is not stayed.
accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this § 190.239 Safety orders. (e) The Associate Administrator may
section. For purposes of this section, the (a) When may PHMSA issue a safety grant or deny, in whole or in part, any
term ‘‘expedited review’’ is defined as order? * * * petition for reconsideration without
the process for making a prompt (b) How is an operator notified of the further proceedings. In the event the
determination of whether the order proposed issuance of a safety order and Associate Administrator reconsider a
should remain in effect or be what are its responses options? * * * final order, a final decision on
terminated, in accordance with (c) How is the determination made reconsideration may be issued without
paragraph (g) of this section. The that a pipeline facility has a condition further proceedings, or, in the
expedited review of an order issued that poses an integrity risk? * * * alternative, additional information, data,
under this paragraph will be complete (d) What factors must PHMSA and comment may be requested by the
upon issuance of such determination. consider in making a determination that Associate Administrator as deemed
(c) * * * a risk condition is present? * * * appropriate.
(e) What information will be included (f) It is the policy of the Associate
(3) A hearing under this section will in a safety order? * * * Administrator to issue notice of the
be conducted pursuant to § 190.211. (f) Can PHMSA take other action taken on a petition for
(4) After conclusion of a hearing enforcement actions on the affected reconsideration expeditiously. In cases
under this section, the presiding official facilities? * * * where a substantial delay is expected,
will submit a recommendation to the (g) May I petition for reconsideration notice of that fact and the date by which
Associate Administrator as to whether of a safety order? Yes, a petition for it is expected that action will be taken
or not a hazardous condition that exists reconsideration may be submitted in is provided to the respondent upon
or may exist requiring corrective action accordance with § 190.249. request and whenever practicable.
expeditiously. Upon receipt of the (g) The Associate Administrator’s
recommendation, the Associate § 190.241 [Reserved]
decision on reconsideration is the final
Administrator will proceed in 32. Add and reserve § 190.241.
agency action. Any application for
accordance with paragraphs (d) through § 190.243 [Reserved] judicial review must be filed no later
(h) of this section. If the Associate than 89 days after the issuance of the
Administrator finds the facility is or 33. Add and reserve § 190.243.
decision in accordance with 49 U.S.C.
would be hazardous to life, property, or § 190.245 [Reserved] 60119(a). Failure to raise an issue in a
the environment, the Associate 34. Add and reserve § 190.245. petition for reconsideration waives the
Administrator, OPS issues a corrective availability of judicial review of that
action order in accordance with this § 190.247 [Reserved] issue.
section or continues a corrective action 35. Add and reserve § 190.247. (h) Judicial review of agency action
order already issued under paragraph 36. Add § 190.249 to subpart B to read under 49 U.S.C. 60119(a) will apply the
(b) of this section. If the Associate as follows: standards of review established in
Administrator does not find the facility
§ 190.249 Petitions for reconsideration. section 706 of title 5.

is or would be hazardous to life,
property, or the environment, the (a) A respondent may petition the Subpart C—[Redesignated as
Associate Administrator will withdraw Associate Administrator for Subpart D]
the allegation of the existence of a reconsideration of a final order issued
hazardous facility contained in the under § 190.213, a compliance order 37. Redesignate existing subpart C as
notice or will terminate a corrective issued under § 190.217, a corrective new subpart D.
action order issued under paragraph (b), action order issued under § 190.233, an 38. Add new subpart C to read as
and promptly notify the owner or order directing amendment of plans or follows:
Subpart C—Criminal Enforcement § 190.293 Referral for prosecution. § 190.335 Petitions for Reconsideration.
If an employee of the Pipeline and (a) Except as provided in § 190.339(d),
§ 190.291 Criminal penalties generally.
Hazardous Materials Safety any interested person may petition the
(a) Any person who willfully and Administration becomes aware of any Associate Administrator for
knowingly violates a provision of 49 actual or possible activity subject to reconsideration of any regulation issued
U.S.C. 60101 et seq. or any regulation or criminal penalties under § 190.291, the under this subpart, or may petition the
order issued thereunder will upon employee reports it to the Office of the Chief Counsel for reconsideration of any
conviction be subject to a fine under Chief Counsel, Pipeline and Hazardous procedural regulation issued under this
title 18 and imprisonment for not more Materials Safety Administration, U.S. subpart and contained in this subpart.
than five years, or both, for each offense. Department of Transportation, The petition must be received not later
(b) Any person who willfully and Washington, DC 20590. The Chief than 30 days after publication of the
knowingly injures or destroys, or Counsel refers the report to OPS for rule in the Federal Register. Petitions
attempts to injure or destroy, any investigation. Upon completion of the filed after that time will be considered
interstate transmission facility, any investigation and if appropriate, the as petitions filed under § 190.331. The
interstate pipeline facility, or any Chief Counsel refers the report to the petition must contain a brief statement
intrastate pipeline facility used in Department of Justice for criminal of the complaint and an explanation as
interstate or foreign commerce or in any prosecution of the offender. to why compliance with the rule is not
activity affecting interstate or foreign 39. Section 190.319 is revised to read practicable, is unreasonable, or is not in
commerce (as those terms are defined in as follows: the public interest.
49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) will, upon * * * * *
§ 190.319 Petitions for extension of time to
conviction, be subject to a fine under comment. 43. Section 190.337 is revised to read
title 18, imprisonment for a term not to as follows:
exceed 20 years, or both, for each A petition for extension of the time to
offense. submit comments must be submitted to § 190.337 Proceedings on petitions for
PHMSA in accordance with § 190.309 reconsideration.
(c) Any person who willfully and and received by PHMSA not later than The Associate Administrator or the
knowingly defaces, damages, removes, 10 days before expiration of the time Chief Counsel may grant or deny, in
or destroys any pipeline sign, right-of- stated in the notice. The filing of the whole or in part, any petition for
way marker, or marine buoy required by petition does not automatically extend reconsideration without further
49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq. or any regulation the time for petitioner’s comments. A proceedings, except where a grant of the
or order issued thereunder will, upon petition is granted only if the petitioner petition would result in issuance of a
conviction, be subject to a fine under shows good cause for the extension, and new final rule. In the event that the
title 18, imprisonment for a term not to if the extension is consistent with the Associate Administrator or the Chief
exceed 1 year, or both, for each offense. public interest. If an extension is Counsel determines to reconsider any
(d) Any person who willfully and granted, it is granted to all persons, and regulation, a final decision on
knowingly engages in excavation it is published in the Federal Register. reconsideration may be issued without
activity without first using an available 40. Section 190.321 is revised to read further proceedings, or an opportunity
one-call notification system to establish as follows: to submit comment or information and
the location of underground facilities in data as deemed appropriate, may be
the excavation area; or without § 190.321 Contents of written comments.
provided. Whenever the Associate
considering location information or All written comments must be in Administrator or the Chief Counsel
markings established by a pipeline English. Any interested person should determines that a petition should be
facility operator; and submit as part of written comments all granted or denied, the Office of the
(1) Subsequently damages a pipeline material considered relevant to any Chief Counsel prepares a notice of the
facility resulting in death, serious bodily statement of fact. Incorporation of grant or denial of a petition for
harm, or property damage exceeding material by reference should be avoided; reconsideration, for issuance to the
$50,000; however, where necessary, such petitioner, and the Associate
incorporated material shall be identified Administrator or the Chief Counsel
(2) Subsequently damages a pipeline by document title and page.
facility and knows or has reason to issues it to the petitioner. The Associate
41. In § 190.327, paragraph (b) is Administrator or the Chief Counsel may
know of the damage but fails to revised to read as follows:
promptly report the damage to the consolidate petitions relating to the
operator and to the appropriate § 190.327 Hearings.
same rules.
authorities; or * * * * * § 190.338 [Amended]
(3) Subsequently damages a (b) Sections 556 and 557 of title 5, 44. In § 190.338, paragraph (c) is
hazardous liquid pipeline facility that United States Code, do not apply to removed and reserved.
results in the release of more than 50 hearings held under this subpart. Unless 45. Section 190.341 is amended by
barrels of product; will, upon otherwise specified, hearings held revising the heading of paragraphs (a),
conviction, be subject to a fine under under this part are informal, non- (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), and (j),
title 18, imprisonment for a term not to adversarial fact-finding proceedings, at and adding paragraph (k) to read as
exceed 5 years, or both, for each offense. which there are no formal pleadings or follows:
(e) No person shall be subject to adverse parties. Any regulation issued
in a case in which an informal hearing § 190.341 Special permits.
criminal penalties under paragraph (a)
of this section for violation of any is held is not necessarily based (a) What is a special permit? * * *
regulation and the violation of any order exclusively on the record of the hearing. (b) How do I apply for a special
issued under §§ 190.217, 190.219 or * * * * * permit? * * *
190.291 if both violations are based on 42. In § 190.335, paragraph (a) is (c) What information must be
the same act. revised to read as follows: contained in the application? * * *
(d) How does PHMSA handle special respect to the pipeline facility governed § 195.402 Procedural manual for
permit applications? * * * by an operator’s plans and procedures operations, maintenance, and emergencies.
(e) Can a special permit be requested may, after notice and opportunity for * * * * *
on an emergency basis? * * * hearing as provided in 49 CFR 190.206 (b) The Administrator or the State
(f) How do I apply for an emergency or the relevant State procedures, require Agency that has submitted a current
special permit? * * * the operator to amend its plans and certification under the pipeline safety
(g) What must be contained in an procedures as necessary to provide a laws (49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) with
application for an emergency special reasonable level of safety. respect to the pipeline facility governed
permit? * * * by an operator’s plans and procedures
(h) In what circumstances will PART 193—LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS may, after notice and opportunity for
PHMSA revoke, suspend, or modify a FACILITIES: FEDERAL SAFETY hearing as provided in 49 CFR 190.206
special permit? * * * STANDARDS or the relevant State procedures, require
(i) Can a denial of a request for a the operator to amend its plans and
special permit or a revocation of an 48. The authority citation for Part 193 procedures as necessary to provide a
existing special permit be appealed? continues to read as follows: 49 U.S.C. reasonable level of safety.
* * * 5103, 60102, 60103, 60104, 60108,
60109, 60110, 60113, 60118; and 49 CFR * * * * *
(j) Are documents related to an
application for a special permit 1.53. PART 199—TRANSPORTATION OF
available for public inspection? * * * 49. In § 193.2017, paragraph (b) is HAZARDOUS LIQUIDS BY PIPELINE
(k) Am I subject to enforcement action revised read as follows:
for non-compliance with the terms and 52. The authority citation for Part 199
conditions of a special permit? Yes. § 192.2017 Plans and procedures. continues to read as follows: 49 U.S.C.
PHMSA inspects for compliance with * * * * * 5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60117, and
the terms and conditions of special (b) The Administrator or the State 60118; 49 CFR 1.53.
permits and if a violation is identified, Agency that has submitted a current 53. In § 199.101, paragraph (b) is
PHMSA will initiate one or more of the certification under section 5(a) of the revised read as follows:
enforcement actions under subpart B of Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act with § 199.101 Anti-drug plan.
this part. respect to the pipeline facility governed
* * * * *
by an operator’s plans and procedures
PART 192—TRANSPORTATION OF (b) The Administrator or the State
may, after notice and opportunity for
NATURAL AND OTHER GAS BY Agency that has submitted a current
hearing as provided in 49 CFR 190.206
PIPELINE: MINIMUM FEDERAL certification under the pipeline safety
or the relevant State procedures, require
SAFETY STANDARDS laws (49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) with
the operator to amend its plans and
respect to the pipeline facility governed
46. The authority citation for Part 192 procedures as necessary to provide a
by an operator’s plans and procedures
continues to read as follows: 49 U.S.C. reasonable level of safety.
may, after notice and opportunity for
5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60109, * * * * * hearing as provided in 49 CFR 190.206
60110, 60113, 60116, 60118, and 60137; or the relevant State procedures, require
and 49 CFR 1.53. PART 195—TRANSPORTATION OF
the operator to amend its plans and
47. In § 192.603, paragraph (c) is HAZARDOUS LIQUIDS BY PIPELINE
procedures as necessary to provide a
revised read as follows: reasonable level of safety.
50. The authority citation for Part 195
§ 192.603 General provisions. continues to read as follows: 49 U.S.C. Issued in Washington, DC, on August 6,
5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60109, 2012.
* * * * *
(c) The Administrator or the State 60116, 60118, and 60137; and 49 CFR Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Agency that has submitted a current 1.53. Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
certification under the pipeline safety 51. In § 195.402, paragraph (b) is [FR Doc. 2012–19571 Filed 8–10–12; 8:45 am]
laws, (49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) with revised read as follows: BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2012 / Notices 34457
published on April 27, 2012, in the ROD Emergency Wetlands Resources Act ADDRESSES: This document can be
approved on June 5, 2012, and in other [16 U.S.C. 3921, 3931]; Wetlands viewed on the PHMSA home page at:
documents in the FHWA project Mitigation [23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(M) http://www.phmsa.dot.gov and in
records. This notice applies to all and 133 (b)(11)]; Flood Disaster docket number PHMSA–2012–0079 at
Federal agency decisions as of the Protection Act [42 U.S.C. 4001– http://www.regulations.gov.
issuance date of this notice and all laws 4128]. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
under which such actions were taken, 9. Executive Orders: E.O. 11990 Chris McLaren, Distribution Integrity
including but not limited to: Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988 Management Program Coordinator at
1. General: National Environmental Floodplain Management; E.O. 281–216–4455, or by email at
Policy Act (NEPA) [42 U.S.C 4321– 12898 Federal Actions To Address chris.mclaren@dot.gov.
4347]; Federal-Aid Highway Act Environmental Justice in Minority
[23 U.S.C. 109 and 23 U.S.C. 128]; Populations and Low Income
Section 6002 of the Safe, Populations; E.O. 11593 Protection I. Background
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient and Enhancement of Cultural Section 192.1009 of the pipeline
Transportation Equity Act: A Resources; E.O. 13007 Indian safety regulations (49 CFR parts 190–
Legacy for Users [SAFETEA–LU— Sacred Sites; E.O. 13175 199) requires each owner or operator of
23 U.S.C. 139]. Consultation and Coordination with a gas distribution pipeline facility to file
2. Air: Clean Air Act [42 U.S.C. 7401– Indian Tribal Governments; E.O. a written report for any mechanical
7671(q)]. 11514 Protection and Enhancement fitting failure that results in a hazardous
3. Land: Section 4(f) of the Department of Environmental Quality; E.O. leak. A hazardous leak is defined in
of Transportation Act of 1966 13112 Invasive Species. (Catalog of § 192.1001 as a leak that represents an
[23 U.S.C. 138 and 49 U.S.C. 303]; Federal Domestic Assistance existing or probable hazard to persons
Land and Water Conservation Fund Program Number 20.205, Highway or property and requires immediate
(LWCF) [16 U.S.C. 4601–4604]; Planning and Construction. The repair or continuous action until the
Landscaping and Scenic regulations implementing Executive conditions are no longer hazardous.
Enhancement (Wildflowers) Order 12372 regarding Each report must be filed by March 15
[23 U.S.C. 319]. intergovernmental consultation on of the following year on a Mechanical
4. Wildlife: Endangered Species Act Federal programs and activities Fitting Failure Report Form (PHMSA F
[16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.]; Magnuson- apply to this program.) 7100.1–2).
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) A report is required for all failures
Management Act [16 U.S.C. 1801, et Issued On: June 5, 2012. regardless of the material composition,
seq.]; Fish and Wildlife type, manufacturer, or size of the fitting.
Michelle Eraut,
Coordination Act [16 U.S.C. 661– The reporting requirements apply to all
667 (d)]; Migratory Bird Treaty Act Program Development Team Leader Salem,
failures that result in a hazardous leak
Oregon.
[16 U.S.C. 703–712]; Bald and due to the use of a fitting and may
[FR Doc. 2012–14045 Filed 6–8–12; 8:45 am]
Golden Eagle Protection Act include failures in the body of the
[16 U.S.C. 668–668(c)]. BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
mechanical fitting, failures in the joints
5. Historic and Cultural Resources: between the fitting and the pipe,
Section 106 of the National Historic indications of leakage from the seals
Preservation Act of 1966, as DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
associated with the fitting, and partial or
amended [16 U.S.C. 470(f)]; Pipeline and Hazardous Materials complete separation of the pipe from the
Archeological Resources Protection Safety Administration fitting. Operators are to report all
Act of 1977 [16 U.S.C. 470(aa)– mechanical fitting failures regardless of
470(ll)]; Archeological and Historic the cause. It is important to note that
Preservation Act [16 U.S.C. 469– [Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0079]
PHMSA does not seek information
469(c)]; Native American Grave Pipeline Safety: Mechanical Fitting related to failures of cast iron bell and
Protection and Repatriation Act Failure Reports spigot joints unless the leak resulted
(NAGPRA) [25 U.S.C. 3001–3013]. from a failure of a mechanical fitting
6. Social and Economic: Title VI of the AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous used to repair or reinforce a joint.
Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. Materials Safety Administration Question 15, ‘‘Apparent Cause of
2000(d) et seq.]; American Indian (PHMSA), DOT. Leak’’, under Part C of PHMSA F
Religious Freedom Act [42 U.S.C. ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory 7100.1–2 specifies various apparent
1996]; Farmland Protection Policy Bulletin. causes of leaks. These causes include
Act (FPPA) [7 U.S.C. 4201–4209]. ‘‘Corrosion,’’ ‘‘Natural Forces,’’
7. Hazardous Materials and Waste: SUMMARY: This notice provides ‘‘Excavation Damage,’’ ‘‘Other Outside
Comprehensive Environmental clarification to owners and operators of Force Damage,’’ ‘‘Material or Welds/
Response, Compensation, and gas distribution pipeline facilities when Fusions,’’ ‘‘Equipment,’’ ‘‘Incorrect
Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. completing the Mechanical Fitting Operation,’’ and ‘‘Other.’’ These
9601–9675; Resource Conservation Failure Report Form, PHMSA F 7100.1– apparent cause options contain two
and Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 2. Initial reviews of reports submitted potential options for a failure that
6901–6992(k). for calendar year 2011 failures have apparently results from incorrect
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
8. Wetlands and Water Resources: Clean identified a need for PHMSA to issue installation of the mechanical fitting.
Water Act [33 U.S.C. 1251–1377]; this notice to provide operators with One option is ‘‘Material or Welds/
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) additional guidance for reporting the Fusions’’ with a subcategory of
[42 U.S.C. 300(f)–300(j)(6)]; Rivers apparent cause. PHMSA has also ‘‘Construction/Installation Defect.’’ The
and Harbors Act of 1899 [33 U.S.C. enhanced the online submittal process other option is ‘‘Incorrect Operation.’’
401–406]; Wild and Scenic Rivers and plans to implement further PHMSA prefers that failures resulting
Act [16 U.S.C. 1271–1287]; improvements. from an installation defect be reported
VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:21 Jun 08, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11JNN1.SGM 11JNN1
34458 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2012 / Notices
using ‘‘Incorrect Operation’’ as the other option is ‘‘Incorrect Operation.’’ Federal Register notice issued by any
apparent cause. It is PHMSA’s intent to PHMSA prefers that failures resulting agency.
capture failure data under the ‘‘Material from an installation defect be reported • Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
or Welds/Fusions’’ leak cause category using ‘‘Incorrect Operation’’ as the • Mail: Docket Management System:
that is specific to manufacture, apparent cause. It is PHMSA’s intent to U.S. Department of Transportation,
fabrication, material, and design defects. capture failure data under the ‘‘Material Docket Operations, M–30, West
In addition, operators have contacted or Welds/Fusions’’ leak cause category Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
PHMSA with a suggestion to expedite that is specific to manufacture, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
the finalization and electronic fabrication, material, and design defects. Washington, DC 20590.
submission of reports. Many operators When creating a report in PHMSA’s • Hand Delivery: DOT Docket
have developed unique identifiers for online system, operators may now Management System: U.S. Department
their mechanical fitting failures. These include a unique identifier for each of Transportation, Docket Operations,
operators have suggested that the form report to help operators distinguish M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
be revised to allow the addition of this reports.
unique identifier to each report. This Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Several operators have requested the Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
will allow for ease of identification and ability to submit multiple reports
prevention of duplicate filing. PHMSA between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.,
simultaneously. PHMSA has begun Monday through Friday, except Federal
has revised the form to collect this work on a function within the online
information. holidays.
system to allow the simultaneous
Over eight thousand Mechanical Instructions: You should identify the
submission of multiple reports.
Fitting Failure Reports were received docket number for the special permit
Issued in Washington, DC on June 4, 2012. request you are commenting on at the
during calendar year 2011. Several
operators have requested the ability to Jeffrey D. Wiese, beginning of your comments. If you
submit multiple reports simultaneously. Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. submit your comments by mail, please
PHMSA has begun work on a function [FR Doc. 2012–14089 Filed 6–8–12; 8:45 am] submit two copies. To receive
within the online system to allow the BILLING CODE 4910–60–P confirmation that PHMSA has received
simultaneous submission of multiple your comments, please include a self-
reports. addressed stamped postcard. Internet
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION users may submit comments at http://
II. Advisory Bulletin (ADB–2012–07) www.Regulations.gov.
To: All Gas Distribution Operators. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Note: Comments are posted without
Subject: Completion of Mechanical Safety Administration changes or edits to http://
Fitting Failure Report Form, Leak [Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0112] www.Regulations.gov, including any personal
Causes. information provided. There is a privacy
Advisory: As specified in § 192.1009, Pipeline Safety: Requests for Special statement published on http://
operators of all gas distribution pipeline Permit www.Regulations.gov.
facilities are required to report the
failure of any mechanical fitting that AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
results in a hazardous leak on a Materials Safety Administration General: Kay McIver by telephone at
Mechanical Fitting Failure Report Form (PHMSA); DOT. (202) 366–0113; or, email at
(PHMSA F 7100.1–2). The report is ACTION: Notice. kay.mciver@dot.gov.
required for all failures regardless of the Technical: Jeffery Gilliam by
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal telephone at (202) 366–0568; or, email
material composition, type,
manufacturer, or size of the fitting. pipeline safety laws, PHMSA is at Jeffery.Gilliam@dot.gov.
Operators are to report all mechanical publishing this notice of special permit
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PHMSA
fitting failures regardless of the cause. requests we have received from
Norgasco, Inc., and BreitBurn Energy has received requests for special permits
Reporting requirements also apply to from two natural gas pipeline operators,
failures resulting from the use of a Company LP, two natural gas pipeline
operators, seeking relief from Norgasco, Inc., (‘‘NI’’), and BreitBurn
fitting and may include failures in the Energy Company LP (‘‘BreitBurn’’)
body of mechanical fitting, failures in compliance with certain requirements
in the Federal pipeline safety seeking relief from compliance with
the joints between the fitting and the certain pipeline safety regulations.1 The
pipe, indications of leakage from the regulations. This notice seeks public
comments on the requests, including requests include a technical analysis
seals associated with the fitting, and provided by the operators. The requests
partial or complete separation of the comments on any safety or
environmental impacts. At the are filed in the Federal Docket
pipe away from the fitting. However, Management System (FDMS) and have
PHMSA does not seek information conclusion of the 30-day comment
period, PHMSA will evaluate the been assigned docket numbers,
related to failures of cast iron bell and (Norgasco—PHMSA–2011–0344 and
spigot joints unless the leak resulted requests and determine whether to grant
or deny a special permit. BreitBurn—PHMSA–2011–0343) in the
from a failure of a mechanical fitting FDMS. We invite interested persons to
used to repair or reinforce a joint. DATES: Submit any comments regarding
participate by reviewing these special
The apparent cause options under these special permit requests by July 11, permit requests at http://
Part C, Question 15 (Apparent Cause of 2012.
www.Regulations.gov, and by
Leak) on PHMSA F 7100.1–2 contain ADDRESSES: Comments should reference submitting written comments, data or
two potential options for a failure that the docket numbers for the specific other views. Please include any
apparently results from incorrect special permit request and may be comments on potential environmental
installation of the mechanical fitting. submitted in the following ways:
One option is ‘‘Material or Welds/ • E-Gov Web Site: http:// 1 Effective December 31, 2011, BreitBurn Energy
Fusions’’ with a subcategory of www.Regulations.gov. This site allows Company LP, changed its name to Pacific Coast
‘‘Construction/Installation Defect.’’ The the public to enter comments on any Energy Company, LP.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:21 Jun 08, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11JNN1.SGM 11JNN1
26822 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Notices
criteria given in § 388.4 of MARAD’s entered into this docket is available on DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
regulations at 46 CFR part 388. the World Wide Web at http://
www.regulations.gov. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Privacy Act Safety Administration
Anyone is able to search the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0068]
electronic form of all comments Joann Spittle, U.S. Department of
received into any of our dockets by the Transportation, Maritime Pipeline Safety: Verification of Records
name of the individual submitting the Administration, 1200 New Jersey
comment (or signing the comment, if Avenue SE., Room W21–203, AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
submitted on behalf of an association, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202– Materials Safety Administration
business, labor union, etc.). You may 366–5979, Email Joann.Spittle@dot.gov. (PHMSA), DOT.
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory
Statement in the Federal Register SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As Bulletin.
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume described by the applicant the intended
service of the vessel LONGWOOD SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78).
BATEAU is: INTENDED COMMERCIAL Advisory Bulletin to remind operators
By Order of the Maritime Administrator. of gas and hazardous liquid pipeline
USE OF VESSEL: ‘‘Day outings, harbor
Dated: April 26, 2012. facilities to verify their records relating
cruises and sightseeing cruises for no
Julie P. Agarwal, to operating specifications for maximum
more than six passengers with one
Secretary, Maritime Administration. allowable operating pressure (MAOP)
licensed captain on a seasonal basis.’’ required by 49 CFR 192.517 and
[FR Doc. 2012–10864 Filed 5–4–12; 8:45 am] GEOGRAPHIC REGION: maximum operating pressure (MOP)
BILLING CODE 4910–81–P ‘‘Massachusetts, Rhode Island, required by 49 CFR 195.310. This
Connecticut and New York.’’ Advisory Bulletin informs gas operators
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The complete application is given in of anticipated changes in annual
DOT docket MARAD–2012–0056 at reporting requirements to document the
Maritime Administration http://www.regulations.gov. Interested confirmation of MAOP, how they will
parties may comment on the effect this be required to report total mileage and
[Docket No. MARAD–2012–0056]
action may have on U.S. vessel builders mileage with adequate records, when
Requested Administrative Waiver of or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.- they must report, and what PHMSA
the Coastwise Trade Laws: Vessel flag vessels. If MARAD determines, in considers an adequate record. In
LONGWOOD BATEAU; Invitation for accordance with 46 U.S.C. 12121 and addition, this Advisory Bulletin informs
Public Comments MARAD’s regulations at 46 CFR Part hazardous liquid operators of adequate
388, that the issuance of the waiver will records for the confirmation of MOP.
AGENCY: Maritime Administration, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Department of Transportation. have an unduly adverse effect on a U.S.-
vessel builder or a business that uses Gale by phone at 202–366–0434 or by
ACTION: Notice. email at john.gale@dot.gov. Information
U.S.-flag vessels in that business, a
waiver will not be granted. Comments about PHMSA may be found at http://
SUMMARY: As authorized by 46 U.S.C.
phmsa.dot.gov.
12121, the Secretary of Transportation, should refer to the docket number of
as represented by the Maritime this notice and the vessel name in order
Administration (MARAD), is authorized for MARAD to properly consider the Background
to grant waivers of the U.S.-build comments. Comments should also state On January 10, 2011, PHMSA issued
requirement of the coastwise laws under the commenter’s interest in the waiver Advisory Bulletin 11–01. This Advisory
certain circumstances. A request for application, and address the waiver Bulletin reminded operators that if they
such a waiver has been received by criteria given in § 388.4 of MARAD’s are relying on the review of design,
MARAD. The vessel, and a brief regulations at 46 CFR Part 388. construction, inspection, testing and
description of the proposed service, is other related data to establish MAOP
listed below. Privacy Act
and MOP, they must ensure that the
DATES: Submit comments on or before records used are reliable, traceable,
Anyone is able to search the
June 6, 2012. electronic form of all comments verifiable, and complete. If such a
ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to received into any of our dockets by the document and records search, review,
docket number MARAD–2012–0056. name of the individual submitting the and verification cannot be satisfactorily
Written comments may be submitted by comment (or signing the comment, if completed, the operator cannot rely on
hand or by mail to the Docket Clerk, submitted on behalf of an association, this method for calculating MAOP or
U.S. Department of Transportation, MOP and must instead rely on another
business, labor union, etc.). You may
Docket Operations, M–30, West method as allowed in 49 CFR 192.619
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, or 49 CFR 195.406.
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Statement in the Federal Register Section 192.619 currently contains
Washington, DC 20590. You may also published on April 11, 2000 (Volume four methods for establishing MAOP: (1)
send comments electronically via the 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78). The design pressure of the weakest
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. By Order of the Maritime Administrator. element in the segment; (2) pressure
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
All comments will become part of this Dated: April 26, 2012. testing; (3) the highest actual operating
docket and will be available for Julie P. Agarwal, pressure in the five years prior to the
inspection and copying at the above segment becoming subject to regulation
Secretary, Maritime Administration.
address between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m., under Part 192; and (4) the maximum
[FR Doc. 2012–10867 Filed 5–4–12; 8:45 am]
E.T., Monday through Friday, except safe pressure considering the history of
federal holidays. An electronic version BILLING CODE 4910–81–P the segment, particularly known
of this document and all documents corrosion and the actual operating
VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:11 May 04, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM 07MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Notices 26823
pressure. The third method, often 1973. The regulatory requirement was records transcribed from original
referred to as the ‘‘grandfather clause,’’ removed in 1996 because the documents as they may contain errors.
allows pipelines that had safely compliance dates had long since passed. Information from a transcribed
operated prior to the pipeline safety PHMSA believes documentation that document, in many cases, should be
MAOP regulations to continue to was used to confirm MAOP in verified with complementary or
operate under similar conditions compliance with this requirement may supporting documents.
without retroactively applying be useful in the current verification Verifiable records are those in which
recordkeeping requirements or requiring effort. information is confirmed by other
pressure tests. complementary, but separate,
Advisory Bulletin (ADB–2012–06) documentation. Verifiable records might
Many of the pipelines being newly
subjected to safety regulation in the To: Owners and Operators of Gas and include contract specifications for a
1970’s were relatively new and had Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Systems. pressure test of a line segment
demonstrated a safe operating history. Subject: Verification of Records complemented by pressure charts or
PHMSA is now considering whether Establishing MAOP and MOP. field logs. Another example might
these pipelines should be pressure Advisory: As directed in the Act, include a purchase order to a pipe mill
tested to verify continued safe MAOP. PHMSA will require each owner or with pipe specifications verified by a
In its August 20, 2011, accident operator of a gas transmission pipeline metallurgical test of a coupon pulled
and associated facilities to verify that from the same pipe segment. In general,
investigation report on the September 9,
their records confirm MAOP of their the only acceptable use of an affidavit
2010, Pacific Gas and Electric Company
pipelines within Class 3 and Class 4 would be as a complementary
natural gas transmission pipeline
locations and in Class 1 and Class 2 document, prepared and signed at the
rupture and fire, the National
locations in HCAs. time of the test or inspection by an
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) PHMSA intends to require gas
recommended that PHMSA should: individual who would have reason to be
pipeline operators to submit data familiar with the test or inspection.
Amend Title 49 CFR 192.619 to delete the regarding mileage of pipelines with Complete records are those in which
grandfather clause and require that all gas verifiable records and mileage of the record is finalized as evidenced by
transmission pipelines constructed before pipelines without records in the annual
1970 be subjected to a hydrostatic pressure a signature, date or other appropriate
reporting cycle for 2013. On April 13, marking. For example, a complete
test that incorporates a spike test. (P–11–14)
2012, (77 FR 22387) PHMSA published pressure testing record should identify a
PHMSA will be addressing this a Federal Register Notice titled: specific segment of pipe, who
recommendation in a future rulemaking. ‘‘Information Collection Activities, conducted the test, the duration of the
On January 3, 2012, President Obama Revision to Gas Transmission and test, the test medium, temperatures,
signed the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Gathering Pipeline Systems Annual accurate pressure readings, and
Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 Report, Gas Transmission and Gathering elevation information as applicable. An
(Act), which requires PHMSA to direct Pipeline Systems Incident Report, and incomplete record might reflect that the
each owner or operator of a gas Hazardous Liquid Pipelines Systems pressure test was initiated, failed and
transmission pipeline and associated Accident Report.’’ PHMSA plans to use restarted without conclusive indication
facilities to provide verification that information from the 2013 Gas of a successful test. A record that cannot
their records accurately reflect MAOP of Transmission and Gathering Pipeline be specifically linked to an individual
their pipelines within Class 3 and Class Systems Annual Report to develop pipe segment is not a complete record
4 locations and in Class 1 and Class 2 potential rulemaking for cases in which for that segment. Incomplete or partial
locations in High Consequence Areas the records of the owner or operator are records are not an adequate basis for
(HCAs). Beginning in 2013, PHMSA insufficient to confirm the established establishing MAOP or MOP. If records
intends to require operators to submit MAOP of a pipeline segment within are unknown or unknowable, a more
data regarding verification of records in Class 3 and Class 4 locations and in conservative approach is indicated.
these class locations via the Gas Class 1 and Class 2 locations in HCAs. PHMSA is aware that other types of
Transmission and Gathering Systems Owners and operators should consider records may be acceptable and that
Annual Report. the guidance in this advisory for all certain state programs may have
Operators of both gas and hazardous pipeline segments and take action as additional requirements. Operators
liquid pipelines should review their appropriate to assure that all MAOP and should ensure all records establish
records to determine whether they are MOP are supported by records that are confidence in the validity of the records.
adequate to support operating traceable, verifiable and complete. If a document and records search,
parameters and conditions on their Information needed to support review, and verification cannot be
pipeline systems or if additional action establishment of MAOP and MOP is satisfactorily completed to meet the
is needed to confirm those parameters identified in § 192.619, § 192.620 and need for traceable, verifiable, and
and assure safety. The Research and § 195.406. An owner or operator of a complete records, the operator may
Special Programs Administration and pipeline must meet the recordkeeping need to conduct other activities such as
the Materials Transportation Bureau, requirements of Part 192 and Part 195 in in-situ examination, measuring yield
PHMSA’s predecessor agencies, support of MAOP and MOP and tensile strength, pressure testing,
recognized the importance of verifying determination. and nondestructive testing or otherwise
MAOP. Prior to 1996, there was a Traceable records are those which can verify the characteristics of the pipeline
regulatory requirement titled: ‘‘Initial be clearly linked to original information to support a MAOP or MOP
Determination of Class Location and about a pipeline segment or facility. determination.

Confirmation or Establishment of Traceable records might include pipe PHMSA is supportive of the use of
Maximum Allowable Operating mill records, purchase requisition, or as- alternative technologies to verify pipe
Pressure’’ at 49 CFR 192.607. This built documentation indicating characteristics. Owners and operators
regulation required operators to confirm minimum pipe yield strength, seam seeking to use alternative or non-
the MAOP on their systems relative to type, wall thickness and diameter. traditional technologies in the
class locations no later than January 1, Careful attention should be given to determination of MAOP or MOP, or to
26824 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2012 / Notices
meet other regulatory requirements, SUMMARY: In compliance with the information to agencies outside BTS for
should first discuss the proposed Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 review, analysis and possible use in
approach with the appropriate state or U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice regulatory and other administrative
Federal regulatory agencies to determine announces that the Information matters.
its acceptability under regulatory Collection Request (ICR) abstracted Comments are invited on: Whether
requirements. below has been forwarded to the Office the proposed collection of information
PHMSA will issue more direction of Management and Budget (OMB) for is necessary for the proper performance
regarding how operators will be extension of currently approved of the functions of the Department
required to bring into compliance gas collections. The ICR describes the concerning consumer protection.
and hazardous liquid pipelines without nature of the information collection and Comments should address whether the
verifiable records for the entire mileage its expected burden. The Federal information will have practical utility;
of the pipeline. Further details will also Register Notice with a 60-day comment the accuracy of the Department’s
be provided on the manner in which period soliciting comments on the estimate of the burden of the proposed
PHMSA intends to require operators to following collection of information was information collection; ways to enhance
reestablish MAOP as discussed in published on February 29, 2012 (77 FR the quality, utility and clarity of the
Section 23(a) of the Act. 12364). No comments were received. information to be collected; and ways to
Finally, PHMSA notes that on DATES: Written comments should be minimize the burden of the collection of
September 26, 2011, NTSB issued submitted by June 6, 2012. information on respondents, including
Recommendation P–11–14: Eliminating FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff the use of automated collection
Grandfather Clause. Section Gorham, Office of Airline Information, techniques or other forms of information
192.619(a)(3) allows gas transmission RTS–42, Room E34, RITA, BTS, 1200 technology.
operators to establish MAOP of pipe New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, Issued in Washington, DC on May 1, 2012.
installed before July 1, 1970, by use of DC 20590–0001, Telephone Number Pat Hu,
records noting the highest actual (202) 366–4406, Fax Number (202) 366– Director, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
operating pressure to which the segment 3383 or Email jeff.gorham@dot.gov. Research and Innovative Technology
was subjected during the five years Comments: Send comments to the Administration.
preceding July 1, 1970. NTSB Office of Information and Regulatory [FR Doc. 2012–10909 Filed 5–4–12; 8:45 am]
Recommendation P–11–14 requests that Affairs, Office of Management and BILLING CODE 4910–HY–P
PHMSA delete § 192.619(a)(3), also Budget, 725–17th Street NW.,
known as the ‘‘grandfather clause,’’ and Washington, DC 20503, Attention:
require gas transmission pipeline RITA/BTS Desk Officer. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
operators to reestablish MAOP using
hydrostatic pressure testing. PHMSA Research & Innovative Technology
OMB Approval No.: 2138–0039.
reminds operators that this Title: Reporting Required for Administration
recommendation will be acted upon International Civil Aviation [Docket ID Number RITA 2008–0002]
following the collection of data, Organization (ICAO).
including information from the 2013 Form No.: BTS Form EF. Agency Information Collection;
Gas Transmission and Gathering Type of Review: Extension of a Activity Under OMB Review;
Pipeline Systems Annual Report, which currently approved collection. Submission of Audit Reports—Part 248
will allow PHMSA to determine the Respondents: Large certificated air
impact of the requested change on the AGENCY: Research & Innovative
carriers.
public and industry in conformance Number of Respondents: 40. Technology Administration (RITA),
with our statutory obligations. Number of Responses: 40. Bureau of Transportation Statistics
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 1, 2012. Total Annual Burden: 26 hours. (BTS), DOT.
Alan K. Mayberry, Needs and Uses: As a party to the ACTION: Notice.
Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Convention on International Civil
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
Operations. Aviation (Treaty), the United States is
obligated to provide ICAO with Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
[FR Doc. 2012–10866 Filed 5–4–12; 8:45 am] U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice
financial and statistical data on
operations of U.S. air carriers. Over 99% announces that the Information
of the data filed with ICAO is extracted Collection Request (ICR) abstracted
from the air carriers’ Form 41 below has been forwarded to the Office
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION of Management and Budget (OMB) for
submissions to BTS. BTS Form EF is the
Research & Innovative Technology means by which BTS supplies the extension of currently approved
Administration remaining 1% of the air carrier data to collections. The ICR describes the
ICAO. nature of the information collection and
[Docket ID Number RITA 2008–0002] The Confidential Information its expected burden. The Federal
Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act Register Notice with a 60-day comment
Agency Information Collection; of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501), requires a period soliciting comments on the
Activity Under OMB Review; Reporting statistical agency to clearly identify following collection of information was
Required for International Civil information it collects for non-statistical published on February 29, 2012 (77 FR
12365). No comments were received.
Aviation Organization (ICAO) purposes. BTS hereby notifies the

respondents and the public that BTS DATES: Written comments should be
AGENCY: Research & Innovative
uses the information it collects under submitted by June 6, 2012.
Technology Administration (RITA),
Bureau of Transportation Statistics this OMB approval for non-statistical FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
(BTS), DOT. purposes including, but not limited to, Gorham, Office of Airline Information,
publication of both Respondent’s RTS–42, Room E34, RITA, BTS, 1200
ACTION: Notice.
identity and its data, submission of the New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
19800 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 63 / Monday, April 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION online instructions for submitting law enforcement program, PHMSA
comments. would take no enforcement action.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Safety Administration • Mail: Docket Operations Facility require agencies to regulate in the ‘‘most
(M–30), U.S. Department of cost-effective manner,’’ to make a
49 CFR Parts 196 and 198 Transportation, West Building, 1200 ‘‘reasoned determination that the
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, benefits of the intended regulation
[Docket No. PHMSA–2009–0192] DC 20590. justify its costs,’’ and to develop
• Hand Delivery: Docket Operations regulations that ‘‘impose the least
RIN 2137–AE43 Facility, U.S. Department of burden on society.’’ The expected
Pipeline Safety: Pipeline Damage Transportation, West Building, Room benefit of this rulemaking action is an
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., increased deterrent to violations of one-
Prevention Programs
Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m. call requirements (though requirements
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, vary by state, a one-call system allows
Materials Safety Administration except Federal holidays. excavators to call one number in a given
(PHMSA), Department of Transportation Instructions: Identify the docket state in order to ascertain the presence
(DOT). number, PHMSA–2009–0192, at the of underground utilities) requirements
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. beginning of your comments. If you mail and the attendant reduction in pipeline
your comments, we request that you incidents and accidents caused by
SUMMARY: This Notice of Proposed send two copies. To receive excavation damage. Based on incident
Rulemaking (NPRM) seeks to revise the confirmation that PHMSA received your reports submitted to PHMSA, failure to
Pipeline Safety Regulations to: Establish comments, include a self-addressed use an available one-call system is a
criteria and procedures for determining stamped postcard. known cause of pipeline accidents.
the adequacy of state pipeline Note: Comments are posted without
PHMSA analyzed the costs and benefits
excavation damage prevention law changes or edits to http:// of the proposed rule. To determine the
enforcement programs; establish an www.regulations.gov, including any personal benefits, PHMSA was able to obtain data
administrative process for making information provided. There is a privacy for three states over the course of the
adequacy determinations; establish the statement published on http:// establishment of their excavation
Federal requirements PHMSA will www.regulations.gov. damage prevention programs (additional
enforce in states with inadequate information about these states can be
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sam
excavation damage prevention law found in the regulatory analysis that is
Hall, Program Manager, PHMSA by in the public docket). Each of the three
enforcement programs; and establish the email at sam.hall@dot.gov or by
adjudication process for administrative states had a decrease of at least 63
telephone at (804) 556–4678 or Larry percent in the number of excavation
enforcement proceedings against White, Attorney Advisor, PHMSA by
excavators where Federal authority is damage incidents occurring after they
email at lawrence.white@dot.gov or by initiated their enforcement programs.
exercised. Pursuant to the Pipeline telephone at (202) 366–9093.
Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, While many factors can contribute to
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the decrease in state excavation damage
and Safety (PIPES) Act of 2006,
establishment of review criteria for state I. Executive Summary incidents, PHMSA found these states to
excavation damage prevention law be a helpful starting point on which to
This NPRM proposes to amend the estimate the benefits of this rulemaking.
enforcement programs is a prerequisite Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations to:
should PHMSA find it necessary to PHMSA utilized three separate
(1) Establish criteria and procedures effectiveness rates to conservatively
conduct an enforcement proceeding PHMSA will use to determine the
against an excavator in the absence of an evaluate the benefits of this rulemaking.
adequacy of state pipeline excavation The rates are based on the reduction of
adequate enforcement program in the damage prevention law enforcement
state where the violation occurs. The incidents of the three states studied and
programs. Such determination is a more conservative effective rates
development of these criteria and the prerequisite should PHMSA find it
subsequent determination of the because state pipeline programs vary
necessary to conduct an administrative widely, which may lead to a lower
adequacy of state excavation damage enforcement proceeding against an
prevention law enforcement programs is effective rate than the three states
excavator for violation of the Federal analyzed. In addition, we compared the
intended to encourage states to develop requirements proposed in this NPRM in
effective excavation damage prevention overall costs of this rule to the average
the absence of adequate state costs associated with a single excavation
law enforcement programs to protect the enforcement of state excavation damage
public from the risk of pipeline ruptures damage incident. PHMSA expects the
prevention laws; (2) establish an total cost of this rule to be $1.2 million
caused by excavation damage, and allow administrative process for states to
for Federal administrative enforcement while the benefits are $23 million.1
contest notices of inadequacy from This rulemaking has three separate
action in states with inadequate PHMSA should they elect to do so; (3)
enforcement programs. potential cost impacts. The costs to
establish the Federal requirements excavators to comply with the Federal
DATES: Persons interested in submitting PHMSA will enforce in states with excavation standard, the cost to states to
written comments on this NPRM must inadequate excavation damage have their enforcement programs
do so by June 1, 2012.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS3
prevention law enforcement programs; reviewed, to appeal a determination of

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference and (4) establish the adjudication ineffectiveness and to ask for
Docket Number PHMSA–2009–0192 process for administrative enforcement reconsideration, and the cost impact on
and may be submitted in the following proceedings against excavators where the Federal government to enforce the
ways: Federal authority is exercised. In the Federal excavation standard. With
• Web Site: Comments should be filed absence of regulations specifying the
at the Federal eRulemaking Portal, criteria that PHMSA will use to evaluate 1 These numbers are discounted over 10 years at
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the a state’s excavation damage prevention 7%.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:31 Mar 30, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02APP3.SGM 02APP3
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 63 / Monday, April 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 19801
regard to the potential cost impacts on effective enforcement of state excavation representatives, and PHMSA. The areas
excavators, PHMSA believes that damage prevention laws is a key to of their investigations included
excavators will not incur any additional reducing pipeline excavation damage excavation damage prevention. The
costs because the Federal excavation incidents. Though all states have a Integrity Management for Gas
standard, which is also a self-executing damage prevention program, not all Distribution, Report of Phase I
standard, mirrors the excavation states adequately enforce their state Investigations (DIMP Report) was issued
standard in each state and does not damage prevention laws. Pursuant to in December 2005.4 As noted in the
impose any additional costs on the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, DIMP Report, the Excavation Damage
excavators. The cost impacts on states Enforcement and Safety Act of 2006 Prevention work/study group reached
are those costs associated with having (PIPES Act), PHMSA is proposing four key conclusions.
their enforcement programs reviewed criteria and procedures for determining • Excavation damage poses by far the
(estimated to be $20,000 per year), to whether a state’s enforcement of its single greatest threat to distribution
appeal a determination of excavation damage prevention laws is system safety, reliability and integrity;
ineffectiveness (estimated to be a one adequate. As mandated by the PIPES therefore, excavation damage prevention
time cost of $125,000) and to ask for Act, such determination is a presents the most significant
reconsideration (estimated to be a one- prerequisite should PHMSA find it opportunity for distribution pipeline
time cost of $350,000). Therefore, the necessary to conduct an administrative safety improvements.
total estimated first year cost impacts on enforcement proceeding against an • States with comprehensive damage
states are (($20,000 (annually) + (14 × excavator for violating Federal prevention programs that include
$25,000) + (5 × $25,000)) = $495,000. excavation standards. This NPRM also effective enforcement have a
The annual cost impacts on states in proposes to establish the administrative substantially lower probability of
subsequent years are estimated to be process for states to contest notices of excavation damage to pipeline facilities
$20,000. The annual cost impacts on the inadequacy PHMSA issues, the Federal than states that do not. The lower
Federal government are estimated to be requirements PHMSA will enforce in probability of excavation damage
approximately $80,000. Therefore, the states with inadequate enforcement translates to a substantially lower risk of
total first year cost of this rulemaking is programs, and the adjudication process serious incidents and consequences
estimated to be $547,688 ($470,000 + for administrative enforcement resulting from excavation damage to
$77,688). The following years the costs proceedings against excavators where pipelines.
are estimated to be approximately Federal authority is exercised. • A comprehensive damage
$100,000 per year. The total cost over III. Background prevention program requires nine
ten years, with a 3% discount rate is important elements be present and
$1,331,876 and at a 7% discount rate is A. Pipeline Incidents Caused by functional for the program to be
$1,182,602. PHMSA is specifically Excavation Damage effective. All stakeholders must
asking for comments on whether it has Excavation damage is a leading cause participate in the excavation damage
adequately captured the scope and size of natural gas and hazardous liquid prevention process. The elements are:
of the costs of this rulemaking. The pipeline failure incidents. For the 1. Enhanced communication between
average annual benefits range from period from 1988 to 2010, 1,613 operators and excavators.
$10,939,602 to $3,445,975. Evaluating incidents, 185 fatalities, 697 injuries, 2. Fostering support and partnership
just the lower range of benefits over ten and $438,785,552 in estimated property of all stakeholders in all phases
years results in a total benefit of over damages were reported as being caused (enforcement, system improvement,
$29,000,000, with a 3% discount rate, by excavation damage on all PHMSA etc.) of the program.
and over $23,000,000, with a 7% regulated pipeline systems in the United 3. Operator’s use of performance
discount rate. In addition, over the past States, including onshore and offshore measures for persons performing
22 years, the average reportable incident hazardous liquid, gas transmission, and locating of pipelines and pipeline
caused $272,200 in property damage gas distribution lines, except gathering construction.
alone. Therefore, if this proposed lines.3 4. Partnership in employee training.
regulatory action prevents just one While excavation damage is the cause 5. Partnership in public education.
average reportable incident per year, in a significant portion of all pipeline 6. Enforcement agencies’ role as
this rulemaking would be cost failure incidents, it is cited as the cause partner and facilitator to help resolve
beneficial. Interested readers should in a relatively higher portion of natural issues.
refer to the Regulatory Evaluation that is gas distribution incidents. To look at 7. Fair and consistent enforcement of
posted in the docket for additional this issue, PHMSA initiated and the law.
sponsored in 2005 an investigation of 8. Use of technology to improve all
information.
the risks and threats to gas distribution parts of the process.
II. Objective systems. This investigation was 9. Analysis of data to continually
Based on incident data PHMSA has conducted through the efforts of four evaluate/improve program effectiveness.
received from pipeline operators, joint work/study groups, each of which • Federal legislation is needed to
excavation damage is a leading cause of included representatives of the support the development and
natural gas and hazardous liquid stakeholder public, the gas distribution implementation of damage prevention
pipeline failure incidents.2 Better, more pipeline industry, state pipeline safety programs that include effective
enforcement as a part of the state’s
2 Data from the U.S. Department of 3 Data from the U.S. Department of pipeline safety program. This is
Transportation, PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety, Transportation, PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety, consistent with the objectives of the
Incident and Accident Reports of Gas Distribution, Incident and Accident Reports of Gas Distribution, state pipeline safety programs, which
Gas Transmission & Gathering and Hazardous Gas Transmission & Gathering and Hazardous are to ensure the safety of the public by
Liquid Pipeline Systems. Pipeline incident and Liquid Pipeline Systems. Pipeline incident and
accident summaries are available on PHMSA accident summaries are available on PHMSA addressing threats to the distribution
Stakeholders Communication Web site at: http:// Stakeholders Communication Web site at: http://
primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/ primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/ 4 This report is available in the rulemaking
Index.htm?nocache=3320. Index.htm?nocache=3320. docket.
infrastructure. The legislation will not B. State Damage Prevention Programs PHMSA published in the Federal
be effective unless it includes There is considerable variability Register on October 29, 2009 (74 FR
provisions for ongoing funding such as among the states in terms of physical 55797). The ANPRM can be viewed at
federal grants to support these efforts. geography, population density, http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID
This funding is intended to be in underground infrastructure, excavation PHMSA–2009–0192. These initiatives
addition to, and independent of, activity, and economic activity. For appear to have contributed to an overall
existing federal funding of state pipeline example, South Dakota is a rural, decline in the rate of excavation
safety programs. agricultural state with a relatively low damages to pipelines and other
Another recent report (Mechanical population density. In contrast, New underground utilities, but PHMSA is
Damage Report) prepared on behalf of Jersey is more densely populated and is unaware of any studies of the direct
PHMSA 5 concluded that excavation host to a greater variety of land uses, effect of these initiatives on the national
damage continues to be a leading cause denser underground infrastructure, and excavation damage rate to pipelines.
of serious pipeline failures and that different patterns of excavation activity. PHMSA invites comments regarding any
better one-call enforcement is a key gap These differences between states equate studies that might have evaluated the
in damage prevention. In that regard, to differences in the risk of excavation effectiveness of these initiatives.
the Mechanical Damage Report noted damage to underground infrastructure, D. The Pipeline Inspection, Protection,
that most jurisdictions have established including pipelines. Denser population Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006
laws to enforce one-call notification often means denser underground On December 29, 2006, the PHMSA’s
compliance; however, the report noted infrastructure; more rural and pipeline safety program was
that many pipeline operators consider agricultural states will have different reauthorized by enactment of the PIPES
lack of enforcement to be degrading the underground infrastructure densities Act. The PIPES Act provides for
effectiveness of one-call programs. The and excavation patterns than more enhanced safety and environmental
report cited that in Massachusetts, 3,000 urbanized states. protection in pipeline transportation,
violation notices were issued from 1986 There is no single, comprehensive
enhanced reliability in the
to the mid-1990s, contributing to a national damage prevention law. On the
transportation of the Nation’s energy
decrease of third-party damage contrary, all 50 states in the United products by pipeline, and other
incidents on all types of facilities from States have a law designed to prevent purposes. Major portions of the PIPES
1,138 in 1986 to 421 in 1993. The report excavation damage to underground Act were focused on damage prevention
also cited findings from another study utilities. However, these state laws vary including additional resources and clear
that enforcement of the one-call considerably and no two state laws are program guidelines as well as additional
notification requirement was the most identical. Therefore, excavation damage enforcement authorities to encourage
influential factor in reducing the prevention stakeholders in each state states in developing effective excavation
probability of pipeline strikes and that are subject to different legal and damage prevention programs. The
the number of pipeline strikes is regulatory requirements. Variances in PIPES Act identifies nine elements that
proportionate to the degree of state laws include excavation notice effective damage prevention programs
enforcement. requirements, damage reporting should include. These are, essentially,
With respect to the effectiveness of requirements, exemptions from the identical to those nine elements noted
current regulations, the Mechanical requirements of the laws for excavators in the DIMP Report discussed in the
Damage Report stated that an estimated and/or utility operators, provisions for previous subsection.
two-thirds of pipeline excavation enforcement of the laws, and many The PIPES Act also provided PHMSA
damage is caused by third parties and others. PHMSA has developed a with limited authority to conduct
found that the problem is compounded reference for understanding the administrative civil enforcement
if the pipeline damage is not promptly variability in these state laws at http:// proceedings against excavators who
reported to the pipeline operator so that primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/ damage pipelines in a state that has
corrective action can be taken. It also DamagePreventionSummary.htm. failed to adequately enforce its
noted ‘‘when the oil pipeline industry C. PHMSA Damage Prevention Efforts excavation damage prevention laws.
developed the survey for its voluntary Specifically, Section 2 of the PIPES Act
spill reporting system—known as the PHMSA has made extensive efforts
provides that the Secretary of
Pipeline Performance Tracking System over many years to improve excavation
Transportation may take civil
(PPTS)—it recognized that damage to damage prevention as it relates to
enforcement action against excavators
pipelines, including that resulting from pipeline safety. These efforts have
who:
excavation, digging, and other impacts, included outreach, grants, and funding 1. Fail to use the one-call notification
is also precipitated by operators (‘‘first of cooperative agreements with a wide system in a state that has adopted a one-
parties’’) and their contractors (‘‘second spectrum of excavation damage call notification system before engaging
parties’’)’’. prevention stakeholders including: in demolition, excavation, tunneling, or
• Public and community
Finally, the report found that for some construction activity to establish the
organizations.
pipeline excavation damage data that location of underground facilities in the
• Excavators and property
was evaluated, ‘‘in more than 50 percent demolition, excavation, tunneling, or
developers.
of the incidents, one-call associations • Emergency responders. construction area;
were not contacted first’’ and that • Local, state and Federal government 2. Disregard location information or
‘‘failure to take responsible care, to agencies. markings established by a pipeline

respect the instructions of the pipeline • Pipeline and other underground facility operator while engaging in
personnel, and to wait the proper time facility operators. demolition, excavation, tunneling, or
accounted for another 50 percent of the • Industry trade associations. construction activity; and
incidents.’’ • Consensus standards organizations. 3. Fail to report excavation damage to
• Environmental organizations. a pipeline facility to the owner or
5 Mechanical Damage Final Report, Michael Baker These initiatives are described in operator of the facility promptly, and
Jr., Inc., April 2009. detail in the ANPRM on this subject that report to other appropriate authorities
by calling the 911 emergency telephone E. Advance Notice of Proposed inadequacy from PHMSA should they
number if the damage results in the Rulemaking elect to do so.
escape of any flammable, toxic, or On October 29, 2009, PHMSA 3. Establish the Federal requirements
corrosive gas or liquid that may published an Advance Notice of PHMSA will enforce in states with
endanger life or cause serious bodily Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to seek inadequate excavation damage
harm or damage to property. feedback and comments regarding the prevention law enforcement programs.
The PIPES Act limited the Secretary’s development of criteria and procedures 4. Establish the adjudication process
ability to take civil enforcement action for determining whether states are for administrative enforcement
against these excavators, unless the adequately enforcing their excavation proceedings against excavators where
Secretary has determined that the state’s damage prevention laws, and for Federal authority is exercised.
enforcement of its damage prevention conducting Federal administrative G. Summary of the Proposed
laws is inadequate to protect safety. enforcement, if necessary. The ANPRM Rulemaking
The following is the applicable also outlined PHMSA’s excavation
damage prevention initiatives and A. Standards for Effective State Damage
citation from the PIPES Act: Prevention Enforcement Programs
described the requirements of the PIPES
SEC. 2. PIPELINE SAFETY AND DAMAGE This NPRM proposes to establish the
Act, which authorizes PHMSA to
PREVENTION.
conduct this rulemaking action. The criteria by which PHMSA will evaluate
(a) ONE CALL CIVIL ENFORCEMENT.— ANPRM may be viewed at http:// state excavation damage prevention law
(1) PROHIBITIONS.—Section 60114 is
www.regulations.gov by searching for enforcement programs for minimum
amended by adding at the end the following:
(d) PROHIBITION APPLICABLE TO Docket ID PHMSA–2009–0192. adequacy to protect public safety.
EXCAVATORS.—A person who engages in Specifically, the ANPRM sought PHMSA is seeking comments on using
demolition, excavation, tunneling, or comments on the following subjects: the following criteria to evaluate the
construction— 1. Criteria for determining the effectiveness of a state’s damage
(1) May not engage in a demolition, adequacy of state excavation damage prevention enforcement program:
excavation, tunneling, or construction prevention law enforcement programs; 1. Does the state have the authority to
activity in a state that has adopted a one-call 2. The administrative procedures enforce its state excavation damage
notification system without first using that available to a state for contesting a prevention law through civil penalties?
system to establish the location of notice of inadequacy should it receive 2. Has the state designated a state
underground facilities in the demolition, one; agency or other body as the authority
excavation, tunneling, or construction area; 3. The Federal requirements for responsible for enforcement of the state
(2) May not engage in such demolition,
excavators that PHMSA would be excavation damage prevention law?
excavation, tunneling, or construction
activity in disregard of location information enforcing in a state that PHMSA has 3. Is the state assessing civil penalties
or markings established by a pipeline facility determined to have an inadequate for violations at levels sufficient to
operator pursuant to subsection (b); and enforcement program; ensure compliance and is the state
(3) Who causes damage to a pipeline 4. The adjudication process that making publicly available information
facility that may endanger life or cause PHMSA would use if PHMSA cited an that demonstrates the effectiveness of
serious bodily harm or damage to property— excavator for failure to comply with the the state’s enforcement program?
(A) May not fail to promptly report the Federal requirements for excavators 4. Does the enforcement authority (if
damage to the owner or operator of the PHMSA establishes through this one exists) have a reliable mechanism
facility; and rulemaking; and (e.g., mandatory reporting, complaint-
(B) If the damage results in the escape of driven reporting, etc.) for learning about
5. The adequacy of PHMSA’s existing
any flammable, toxic, or corrosive gas or
requirements for pipeline operators to excavation damage to underground
liquid, may not fail to promptly report to
other appropriate authorities by calling the participate in one-call organizations, facilities?
911 emergency telephone number. respond to dig tickets, and perform their 5. Does the state employ excavation
(e) PROHIBITION APPLICABLE TO locating and marking responsibilities. damage investigation practices that are
UNDERGROUND PIPELINE FACILITY A summary of comments and our adequate to determine the at-fault party
OWNERS AND OPERATORS.—Any owner response to those comments are when excavation damage to
or operator of a pipeline facility who fails to provided later in the document. underground facilities occurs?
respond to a location request in order to 6. At a minimum, does the state’s
prevent damage to the pipeline facility or F. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking excavation damage prevention law
who fails to take reasonable steps, in This NPRM proposes to respond to require the following?
response to such a request, to ensure accurate
the Congressional mandate specified in a. Excavators may not engage in
marking of the location of the pipeline
facility in order to prevent damage to the
Section 2 of the PIPES Act to: excavation activity without first using
pipeline facility shall be subject to a civil 1. Establish criteria and procedures an available one-call notification system
action under section 60120 or assessment of PHMSA will use to determine the to establish the location of underground
a civil penalty under section 60122. adequacy of state pipeline excavation facilities in the excavation area.
(f) LIMITATION.—The Secretary may not damage prevention law enforcement b. Excavators may not engage in
conduct an enforcement proceeding under programs. Such determination is a excavation activity in disregard of the
subsection (d) for a violation within the prerequisite should PHMSA find it marked location of a pipeline facility as
boundaries of a state that has the authority necessary to conduct an administrative established by a pipeline operator.
to impose penalties described in section
enforcement proceeding against an c. An excavator who causes damage to

60134(b)(7) against persons who violate that excavator for violation of the Federal a pipeline facility:
state’s damage prevention laws, unless the
Secretary has determined that the state’s
requirements proposed in this NPRM in i. Must report the damage to the
enforcement is inadequate to protect safety, the absence of adequate state owner or operator of the facility at the
consistent with this chapter, and until the enforcement of state excavation damage earliest practical moment following
Secretary issues, through a rulemaking prevention laws. discovery of the damage; and,
proceeding, the procedures for determining 2. Establish an administrative process ii. If the damage results in the escape
inadequate state enforcement of penalties. for states to contest notices of of any flammable, toxic, or corrosive gas
or liquid that may endanger life or cause and no later than the next annual prevention laws. First, in the comments
serious bodily harm or damage to review. to the ANPRM on this subject,
property, must promptly report to other PHMSA invites further comments on stakeholders expressed their desire for
appropriate authorities by calling the these proposed administrative states to maintain control over their own
911 emergency telephone number or procedures. In particular, does this excavation damage prevention
another emergency telephone number. process strike the right balance between programs, including the enforcement of
7. Does the state limit exemptions for Congress’ direction to undertake Federal damage prevention laws. Stakeholders
excavators from its excavation damage administrative enforcement, where agree that damage prevention is a local
prevention law? A state must provide to necessary, while providing a state with and state issue and would prefer to
PHMSA a written justification for any a fair and efficient means of showing avoid Federal involvement in
exemptions for excavators from state that the state’s enforcement program is enforcement. Second, this NPRM
damage prevention requirements. adequate? PHMSA is proposing to proposes to reduce PHMSA base grant
PHMSA will make the written evaluate state excavation damage funding for state pipeline safety
justifications available to the public. prevention law enforcement programs programs if states do not implement
PHMSA may also consider individual consistent with the criteria proposed in effective enforcement programs within
enforcement actions taken by a state in Section 198.55 below. For states that five years of findings of inadequacy (see
evaluating the effectiveness of a state’s have been deemed to have inadequate proposed section 198.53). The potential
damage prevention enforcement enforcement programs in their most reduction in grant funding will provide
program. PHMSA requests comments on recent annual reviews and in incentive to the state to address
this issue. accordance with the established enforcement gaps in the excavation
PHMSA invites comments on the process, PHMSA could conduct Federal damage prevention laws and programs.
proposed criteria. In particular, are administrative enforcement against PHMSA specifically requests comments
these criteria sufficient to assess the excavators without further state process. on the adequacy of these incentives and
adequacy of state excavation damage A state with an inadequate program will the need for additional incentives for
prevention law enforcement programs? have five years from the date of the states to enforce their own excavation
Do these criteria strike the right balance finding to make program improvements damage prevention laws.
between establishing standards for that meet PHMSA’s criteria for Currently, states are reevaluating their
minimum adequacy of state minimum adequacy. A state that fails to pipeline safety laws. Several states,
enforcement programs without being establish an adequate enforcement including Washington and Maryland,
overly prescriptive? program in accordance with 49 CFR made significant changes to their
B. Administrative Process for States 198.55 within five years of the finding damage prevention laws subsequent to
of inadequacy may be subject to reduced the ANPRM on this subject. In addition,
This NPRM proposes the grant funding established under 49 the following states are in various stages
administrative procedures that would be U.S.C. 60107. The amount of the of legislative efforts to incorporate
available to a state that elects to contest reduction will be determined using the effective enforcement into their laws
a notice of inadequacy. The proposed same process PHMSA currently uses to (these efforts range from stakeholder
procedures involve a paper hearing distribute the grant funding; PHMSA meetings, to building support for
where PHMSA finds the state’s will factor the findings from the annual drafting legislation, to actually having a
excavation damage prevention law review of the excavation damage bill before the state legislatures):
enforcement inadequate and documents prevention enforcement program into California, Ohio, Michigan, Alabama,
the basis for that finding (i.e., following the 49 U.S.C. 60107 grant funding Mississippi, Montana, Florida,
its annual review of the state’s pipeline distribution to state pipeline safety Kentucky, and Delaware.
safety program). Then, the state would programs. The amount of the reduction
have an opportunity to submit written in 49 U.S.C. 60107 grant funding shall C. Federal Excavation Standard
materials and explanations. PHMSA not exceed 10% of prior year funding. This NPRM proposes to add a new
would then make a final written If a state fails to implement an adequate Part 196 to Title 49, Code of Federal
determination including the reasons for enforcement program within five years Regulations that prescribes standards for
the decision. PHMSA proposes to make of a finding of inadequacy, the Governor excavators to follow in conducting
publicly available all notices, findings of that state may petition the excavation activities in areas where
and determinations. The proposed Administrator of PHMSA, in writing, for underground gas or hazardous liquid
administrative procedures also provide a temporary waiver of the penalty, pipelines may be located and the
for an opportunity for the state to provided the petition includes a clear administrative enforcement process to
petition for reconsideration of the plan of action and timeline for address violations of the standards. The
decision. If the state’s enforcement achieving program adequacy. Federal requirements PHMSA is
program is ultimately deemed Even though the proposed rule does proposing to be contained in this Part
inadequate, direct Federal not require states to take any actions, are the standards that PHMSA would
administrative enforcement against an the states have several incentives for enforce against excavators in states
excavator who damaged a pipeline in enforcing their own excavation damage determined to have inadequate damage
that state could proceed. The prevention laws. First, states with prevention law enforcement programs
procedures also give a state the effective enforcement programs have pursuant to the procedures proposed in
opportunity to demonstrate at a later lower rates of excavation damages to this rulemaking. The standard that
time that it has improved its excavation underground utilities, including PHMSA is proposing are effectively
damage prevention law enforcement pipelines. Lower damage rates translate equivalent to the standard in 49 U.S.C.
program to an adequate level and upon to increased public and worker safety 60114(d) which states:
such showing, request that PHMSA and decreased repair and outage costs (d) Prohibition applicable to excavators.—
discontinue Federal administrative for pipeline operators. A person who engages in demolition,
enforcement in that state. PHMSA will This proposed rule provides several excavation, tunneling, or construction—
respond to such requests and perform additional incentives for states to (1) May not engage in a demolition,
an adequacy review in a timely manner enforce their own excavation damage excavation, tunneling, or construction
activity in a state that has adopted a one-call in the sense that excavators contesting Æ The Texas Pipeline Association
notification system without first using that a citation would have to prepare a (TPA)
system to establish the location of written response for the record and Æ The Texas Pipeline Safety Coalition
underground facilities in the demolition, potentially appear before an (TPSC)
excavation, tunneling, or construction area; Æ The Texas Oil and Gas Association
(2) May not engage in such demolition,
administrative hearing officer? Is the
excavation, tunneling, or construction process not formal enough in the sense (TxOGA)
activity in disregard of location information that it does not provide for formal rules • Transmission and distribution
or markings established by a pipeline facility of evidence, transcriptions, or pipeline companies
operator pursuant to subsection (b); and discovery? Or does this process strike Æ Atlanta Gas Light Resources (AGL)
(3) Who causes damage to a pipeline the right balance by being informal Æ Baltimore Gas and Electric
facility that may endanger life or cause enough to be efficient and at the same Company (BGE)
serious bodily harm or damage to property— time providing enough formality that Æ CenterPoint Energy
(A) May not fail to promptly report the excavators feel the process is fair and Æ El Paso Pipeline Group (EPPG)
damage to the owner or operator of the Æ LDH Energy Pipeline, L.P.
facility; and
their ‘‘due process are maintained’’?
Æ Marathon Pipeline
(B) If the damage results in the escape of E. State Base Grant Æ Michigan Consolidated Gas
any flammable, toxic, or corrosive gas or Company
liquid, may not fail to promptly report to PHMSA already conducts annual
Æ MidAmerican Energy Company
other appropriate authorities by calling the program evaluations and certification
Æ Nicor Gas
911 emergency telephone number. reviews of state pipeline safety Æ Northern Natural Gas Company
The NPRM proposes to add new programs. PHMSA would also conduct Æ Paiute Pipeline
excavation standards that include annual reviews of state excavation Æ Panhandle Energy
requirements to use an available one- damage prevention law enforcement Æ San Diego Gas & Electric
call system before digging, to excavate programs. A state that fails to establish Æ Southern California Gas Company
with proper regard for location an adequate enforcement program in Æ Spectra Energy Transmission
information or markings established by accordance with 49 CFR 198.55 within • The National Association of
a pipeline operator, to promptly report five years of the finding of inadequacy Pipeline Safety Representatives
any damage to the pipeline operator, may be subject to reduced grant funding (NAPSR)
and to report any emergency release of established under 49 U.S.C. 60107. • Individual state pipeline regulatory
hazardous products to appropriate PHMSA would factor the findings from authorities
authorities by calling 911 immediately. the annual review of the excavation Æ The Florida Public Service
PHMSA is seeking comment in this damage prevention enforcement Commission
NPRM on whether or not it should program into the 49 U.S.C. 60107 grant Æ The Minnesota Office of Pipeline
establish an upper limit on the time funding distribution to state pipeline Safety
frame to report any damage to pipeline safety programs. The amount of the Æ The Missouri Public Service
operators, such as two hours following reduction in 49 U.S.C. 60107 grant Commission (PSC)
discovery. funding would not exceed 10 percent of Æ The Public Utilities Commission of
prior year funding. If a state fails to Ohio (PUCO)
D. Adjudication Process for Excavators implement an adequate enforcement Æ The Tennessee Regulatory
PHMSA is proposing to use the same program within five years of a finding Authority (TRA) excavator contractor
adjudication process established for of inadequacy, the Governor of that state associations
pipeline safety violations set forth in 49 may petition the Administrator of Æ The Associated General Contractors
CFR Part 190. Under this process, PHMSA, in writing, for a temporary of America (AGC)
excavators would have the same right as waiver of the penalty, provided the Æ The Associated General Contractors
pipeline operators to: Receive written petition includes a clear plan of action of Texas (AGC of Texas)
and timeline for achieving program Æ The National Utility Contractor
notice of the allegations including a
adequacy. PHMSA would use the Association (NUCA)
description of the factual evidence the
proposed 49 CFR 198.55 criteria to Æ The Wisconsin Underground
allegations are based on, file a written
evaluate the effectiveness of a state’s Contractors Association (WUCA)
response to the allegations, request a • One-call organizations
hearing, be represented by counsel if the excavation damage prevention
enforcement program. Æ Joint Utility Locating Information
excavator so chooses, examine the for Excavators, Inc. (JULIE)
evidence, submit relevant information IV. Analysis of Public Comments on the Æ GulfSafe
and call witnesses on the excavator’s ANPRM • A utilities locating service
behalf, and otherwise contest the Æ The United States Infrastructure
allegations of violation. PHMSA PHMSA received comments from 39
organizations and 152 individuals, Corporation (USIC)
proposes that hearings would be held as • A local/regional damage prevention
they are now for pipeline operators at including:
council
one of PHMSA’s regional offices or via • Associations representing pipeline
Æ The Greater Chicago Damage
teleconference. An excavator would also operators (trade associations)
Prevention Council
have the same opportunity as pipeline Æ The American Gas Association • A citizens’ interest group
operators to petition for reconsideration (AGA) Æ The Pipeline Safety Trust (PST)
Æ The American Petroleum Institute
of the agency’s administrative decision. • The Association of American

Judicial review of the final agency (API) Railroads
action would be available to the same Æ The American Public Gas • An excavation equipment
extent it is available to a pipeline Association (APGA) manufacturer
operator. Æ The Association of Oil Pipelines • 154 individuals, 145 of whom
PHMSA invites further comments on (AOPL) submitted substantially similar to
the adjudication process for excavators. Æ The Interstate Natural Gas comments submitted by excavation
In particular, is the process too formal Association of America (INGAA) contractors.
To a substantial extent, the comments General Comments damage prevention program is

supported the need for this rulemaking. enforcement action against excavators
Involve All Stakeholders in This
When a pipeline is struck during an that do not follow the one-call laws, and
Rulemaking Process
excavation project, not only is the that without enforcement, there is little
public put at risk and energy supplies A number of comments supported incentive for excavators to comply with
potentially disrupted, but the excavator PHMSA’s approach of involving all one-call laws. However, AGC, API and
personnel are also at risk of serious stakeholders in this rulemaking process. AOPL commented that Federal
Several commenters, including NAPSR, administrative enforcement should not
injury or even death. In the ANPRM,
Missouri Public Service Commission, be permanent. It should only last as long
PHMSA posed some specific questions INGAA, and EPPG commented that
related to state excavation damage as necessary to ensure the state achieves
beyond reviewing the written a successful enforcement program. They
prevention programs. Many comments comments, PHMSA should conduct noted that PHMSA should reserve
received were general to the entire public meetings on this topic, and enforcement to only those specific
ANPRM and others addressed specific should lead open and on-going circumstances permitted by law when a
sections and content of the ANPRM. discussions of the issues as they arise, state fails to meet the test for adequate
The general comments and comments through the most appropriate venues. enforcement of its excavation damage
related to specific sections of the They noted that public meetings would prevention laws. They contended that
ANPRM are addressed individually allow all stakeholder groups to present where strong and effective state
below. their viewpoints and hear similar excavation damage prevention laws and
Many commenters addressed the presentations from others, thus enforcement programs exist, PHMSA
concept of the questions, as was providing an effective means of need not and should not exert its
intended. Others addressed the gathering additional information that Federal authority lest a costly,
would assist PHMSA in developing potentially inefficient layer of Federal
questions as they were deemed to apply
standards for auditing the adequacy of oversight result.
currently to specific state damage
states’ excavation damage prevention Conversely, WUCA commented that
prevention (SDP) programs. enforcement programs and in issuing an all enforcement of state excavation
Additionally, many comments received effective and practicable rulemaking. damage prevention laws should be at a
are outside the scope of the proposed NAPSR especially wants to be involved state or local level and that the Federal
regulatory changes. Many of the in the rulemaking process. Government should not be involved at
comments were to the effect that all in enforcement. WUCA commented
PHMSA enforcement should be applied Response
that excavators who damage
to all underground utilities. For PHMSA recognizes the value of open underground facilities already pay for
example, NAPSR, the Missouri Public and ongoing discussions related to this ‘‘at fault’’ damages and can be removed
Service Commission, AGA, and several rulemaking, and, therefore, took the from bid lists for specific utilities. They
pipeline operators commented that any optional step of publishing an ANPRM consider free enterprise to the best
rulemaking language should clearly in October 2009 to provide information ‘‘enforcement’’ available and want no
specify the scope to which it applies to and solicit feedback from Federal Government involvement, and
and that if PHMSA seeks to expand its stakeholders. PHMSA also conducted a prefer, at most, state enforcement.
enforcement authority outside of meeting with NAPSR to discuss JULIE, commented that it would seem
pipeline matters, its legal authority to NAPSR’s position and concerns on the contradictory that a particular state’s
do so should be explained. While issues identified in the ANPRM. The excavation damage prevention
commenters believe that many states minutes from the meeting are available enforcement program could be ‘‘taken
on the ANPRM docket (http:// over’’ by an agency (i.e., PHMSA) whose
will benefit from broadening their
www.regulations.gov, Docket ID jurisdiction is limited solely to
damage prevention programs beyond
PHMSA–2009–0192). PHMSA does not pipelines. JULIE suggested that PHMSA
pipelines to include other underground intend to hold public meetings related limit itself to providing assistance to
utilities, PHMSA’s authority does not to this rulemaking after the NPRM is state excavation damage prevention
extend beyond pipeline facilities and, as published. As an alternative, PHMSA systems to help them improve
defined in the PIPES Act, excavators will post a recorded presentation enforcement of state excavation damage
under certain specified conditions. pertaining to the NPRM on the PHMSA prevention laws.
Federal pipeline safety regulations Web site. The recorded presentation
Response
require gas and hazardous liquid will provide an overview of the
pipeline operators to have excavation proposed rule and encourage viewers to Congress provided that PHMSA
damage prevention programs in place to read and comment on the NPRM. undertake this rulemaking action in
protect their pipelines. These Section 2 of the PIPES Act. The PIPES
Federal Administrative Enforcement Act requires that PHMSA must
regulations require pipeline operators to
USIC Locating Services, API, AOPL, determine that a state’s excavation
participate in state one-call systems and
INGAA, and several pipeline operators damage prevention law enforcement
enable PHMSA enforcement against
commented that PHMSA should program is inadequate before PHMSA
regulated pipeline operators who fail to develop the necessary processes and may take enforcement action for a
comply with applicable locating and procedures and should not hesitate to violation by an excavator occurring in
marking requirements, including
use the Federal administrative that state. Thus, PHMSA cannot take
situations where their pipelines are enforcement authority granted by enforcement actions against excavators
damaged by improper excavation Congress to enforce excavation damage in states determined by PHMSA to have
activities of the pipeline operator or its prevention laws where state adequate enforcement programs.
contractors (either excavating or enforcement programs are determined to PHMSA’s goal is to encourage states to
locating contractors). be inadequate. They consider it to be in implement adequate enforcement
the public’s best interest and that a key programs. Federal administrative
element of an effective excavation enforcement is not intended to be the
primary means of pipeline damage AGA and several pipeline operators Response
prevention enforcement and is instead commented that PHMSA should keep As noted, PHMSA supports effective
intended to provide incentives for states the overall review process and the state excavation damage prevention law
to develop and implement adequate criteria for determining the adequacy of enforcement to protect pipelines.
programs and serve as a backstop in state programs as simple as possible. PHMSA strongly believes that
states with inadequate programs. They noted that PHMSA’s evaluation of individual states should retain the
State Program Evaluation Should the adequacy of states’ excavation primary responsibility to enforce their
Include an Appeals Process damage prevention programs should be excavation damage prevention laws
based upon a relatively short list of effectively. The proposed regulations do
Several commenters noted that the elements. They also noted that PHMSA not conflict with the best practices
process for determining whether a will likely discover that few states have established by the Common Ground
state’s enforcement of its excavation an excavation damage prevention Alliance.
damage prevention law is ‘‘inadequate’’ program that would clearly meet all or
should contain an appeals process and Apply Enforcement to All Excavators—
even most of the criteria listed in the
timeframe by which PHMSA needs to No Exemptions
ANPRM.
respond to appeals. Northern Natural Several respondents, including NUCA
Gas commented that the rulemaking Response and EPPG, commented that state
should provide for an arbitration excavation damage prevention laws and
element when there is a dispute over a PHMSA agrees that the criteria for
evaluating the adequacy of state enforcement processes should apply to
state’s enforcement program, and that pipeline operator ‘‘in-house’’ and
the state should be allowed an excavation damage prevention law
contractor excavators. They noted that
opportunity to improve its excavation enforcement programs should be clear,
‘‘first-party’’ (facility operators) and
damage prevention program if PHMSA well-defined, consistent, and as simple
‘‘second-party’’ (operator contractor)
determines that the program does not as possible. These criteria helped guide
damages, although often unreported,
meet the minimum Federal development of the criteria proposed in
carry the same consequences as pipeline
requirements. this NPRM. PHMSA seeks comments on damages caused by landscapers, home
these criteria. owners, and other ‘‘third-party’’
Response
PHMSA Should Encourage States To excavators.
This NPRM proposes the Implement and Enforce Effective AGA and several pipeline operators
administrative process by which a state Damage Prevention Laws noted that the term ‘‘excavator’’ is used
may contest a notice of inadequacy from throughout the ANPRM but that it was
PHMSA. Additionally, states deemed to Many commenters, including the not clear what constitutes an excavator
have inadequate excavation damage AGC, API, AOPL, INGAA, state or excavation, thus clarification is
prevention law enforcement programs regulatory agencies and many needed.
will have the opportunity to enhance individual pipeline operators, agree NUCA, API, AOPL, and several
their programs and to demonstrate their with PHMSA’s goal of encouraging pipeline operators commented that the
adequacy through periodic reviews. states to implement, maintain and scope of enforcement for all programs,
Programs PHMSA previously enforce effective excavation damage Federal and state, should encompass all
determined to be inadequate may later prevention laws. They encouraged excavators, including state agencies,
be found adequate if a state takes steps PHMSA to move forward promptly to municipalities, counties, parishes,
to implement an effective enforcement issue a final rule to accomplish the agricultural entities, and railroads. They
program (see proposed Subpart D of Part objective set forth in the ANPRM of believe that state law should require all
198). promoting better, more effective excavators to call the one-call center
Minimum Damage Prevention Program enforcement of state excavation damage and request facilities to be located and
Requirements prevention laws. The NUCA and several marked before digging, and that the
pipeline trade associations recognized exclusion of a category of excavator
API, INGAA, several pipeline that PHMSA’s jurisdiction is limited to should be considered a basis for
operators, and three Texas pipeline gas and hazardous liquid pipelines. PHMSA regulation and direct
associations commented that PHMSA They commented, however, that this enforcement.
should establish clear, well-defined, and regulation’s influence on how state
consistent minimum criteria for Response
authorities adjust their programs and
determining the adequacy of acceptable enforcement practices to protect all PHMSA agrees that state excavation
state excavation damage prevention underground facilities will be damage prevention laws and
laws and programs. API, AOPL and significant, and that addressing enforcement should apply to all
Nicor commented that the fundamental excavators, including pipeline operators
enforcement in a balanced and
minimum requirements that should and their contract excavators and
comprehensive manner in the proposed
apply in evaluating state programs are locators. Current Federal pipeline safety
rule will facilitate the entire process.
that all excavators, including state regulations at 49 CFR 192.614 and
agencies and municipalities: (1) Use Three Texas pipeline associations 195.442, require gas and hazardous
state one-call systems prior to suggested that standards consistent with liquid pipeline operators, respectively,
key aspects of the Common Ground
excavation, (2) follow location to comply with specific excavation

information or markings established by Alliance Best Practices should be damage prevention requirements.
pipeline operators, (3) report all adopted by states to ensure the scope of PHMSA and its state partners have
excavation damage to pipeline their enforcement programs are authority to enforce these regulations
operators, and (4) immediately notify adequate. They noted those key against pipeline operators and can
emergency responders by calling 911 provisions include tolerance zone, pursue enforcement action against
when excavation damage results in a positive response, due care in pipeline operators when an operator’s
release of pipeline products. excavating, and reporting damages. employees or its contractors, including
excavators and locators, violate the rulemaking. For example, WUCA asked issues of inadequacy. Centerpoint
regulations. for clarification of where enforcement commented that costs for PHMSA could
PHMSA also agrees that, in general, would start—with gas mains or service be assessed to the losing party or split
exemptions of categories of excavators lines or both. PUCO and some gas between the two.
from state excavation damage pipeline operators asked that the term Centerpoint commented that a
prevention laws can be problematic ‘‘incident’’ be clarified. Is it as defined complaint-based process would allow
because exempt excavators can damage in 49 CFR § 191.3? Does it mean only the operator, excavator, the state agency
underground utilities. However, some incidents reportable under the and PHMSA to direct time and
exemptions may be justifiable in some applicable Federal or state law? Or, does resources where they are most needed.
states, especially where substantiated by it mean every event wherein damage Centerpoint believes that a pipeline
data (e.g., Virginia’s exemptions for occurs, regardless of the magnitude or operator is in the best position to
VDOT). States are ultimately consequences? PUCO also commented determine when an excavator is
responsible for establishing their own that the definition and implications of a willfully ignoring the excavation
excavation damage prevention laws. state program designation of ‘‘nominally damage prevention program and will
Under this proposed rule, only adequate’’ need to be clarified. likely continue to do so in spite of any
homeowners using hand tools, as NAPSR asked what ‘‘available’’ actions the operator takes. They also
opposed to than mechanized excavating means, regarding the question in the consider that an operator can collect
equipment, on their own property are ANPRM ‘‘Are records of investigations evidence to show it was unable to
exempt from Federal administrative and enforcement available to PHMSA?’’ change excavator behavior and that
enforcement action. All other excavators Additionally, NAPSR asked for punitive enforcement is needed, and to
would be subject to Federal enforcement clarification on the terms ‘‘reasonable show that Federal administrative
in a state PHMSA deems to have an care’’ and ‘‘timely.’’ Other terms noted enforcement is necessary because a
inadequate enforcement program, for clarification include: all excavation state’s enforcement efforts were not
regardless of an excavator’s exemption damage, damage, incident, excavation, adequate to affect the behavior of the
status under that state’s law. and excavator.
excavators. Similarly, Centerpoint
Fines and Penalties Response comments that excavators should be
This rulemaking applies to all able to file complaints against operators
Many commenters acknowledged that
excavators and excavation activities that that will not respond to locate requests
the use and application of civil
affect any gas or hazardous liquid or that consistently do a poor job of
penalties is necessary as an effective
pipelines subject to the pipeline safety locating their facilities.
tool to deter violations of state
excavation damage prevention laws that laws in 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq., Response
could lead to pipeline damage. including gathering, transmission, and
Comments also indicated that civil distribution pipelines (including gas PHMSA proposes to use the criteria
penalties should be applied at an mains and service lines). Those terms and procedures proposed in this NPRM
appropriate level to achieve such are defined in existing laws and to assess the adequacy of state
deterrence, including the escalation of regulations. PHMSA will retain the excavation damage prevention law
fines and penalties for repeat offenders. discretion to determine if enforcement enforcement programs. Once those
Northern Natural Gas and others agreed action is necessary on a case-by-case evaluations are complete, PHMSA will
that a responsible state agency should basis. In response to commenters’ determine, on a state-by-state basis, if
have the ability to levy fines and civil concerns, PHMSA has taken care to Federal administrative enforcement
penalties similar to the Federal clearly define terms in this regulation. action is necessary in states deemed by
maximums. However, several PHMSA to have inadequate enforcement
Complaint-Based Enforcement Process programs. Under § 198.55, PHMSA
commenters, including PUCO, noted
that PHMSA could clarify the maximum Centerpoint Energy suggested a would evaluate the state enforcement
civil penalties PHMSA will require for ‘‘complaint-based’’ process in which a program in its entirety, but may also
a state program to be determined pipeline operator or an excavator can consider individual enforcement actions
‘‘adequate.’’ Additionally, some file a complaint to petition for taken by a state where warranted.
commented that education and training enforcement actions by the state, or to PHMSA may become aware of a
should be considered in lieu of fines petition PHMSA to review the adequacy potential need for Federal
and penalties for minor violations. of the state’s enforcement process. administrative enforcement through a
Centerpoint expressed the view that variety of mechanisms, including
Response PHMSA should only initiate notifications of reportable incidents,
PHMSA is not proposing a specific enforcement actions upon receipt of instances of a serious and recurring
penalty amount or schedule as a filed complaints and that one allegation nature where excavators fail to comply
criterion in determining the adequacy of in each complaint would have to be that with the Federal requirements proposed
state excavation damage prevention law the state’s enforcement process is not in this NPRM, or by other means,
enforcement programs. However, state adequate to prevent repeated violations. including complaints. PHMSA requests
penalty levels should be sufficient to Centerpoint would prefer that the state comments on ways or mechanisms that
deter violations. PHMSA will review could intervene as an interested party it can utilize to become aware of these
state enforcement records on a state-by- and dispute the claim and PHMSA incidents. PHMSA believes it is
state basis. would have to conduct a hearing and important to retain flexibility in the
require specific findings concerning process used to make decisions
Clarification of Terminology and Parties what aspects of the state’s enforcement concerning the use of Federal
Subject to PHMSA Enforcement Action efforts were inadequate. Centerpoint administrative enforcement authority.
Several comments asked for considers that findings of inadequacy PHMSA will only conduct enforcement
clarification of some terminology used would relieve the complaining parties in states deemed to have inadequate
in the ANPRM or, in some cases, from the duty to resolve disputes at the enforcement programs in accordance
clarification of the scope of the state level until the state resolved those with the criteria outlined in this NPRM.
Evaluate Enforcement Programs, Not prevention law to meet the nine State Authority for Interstate Pipeline
Individual Enforcement Actions elements should not be punished by Operators
INGAA and others commented that having its level of funding decreased. Paiute Pipeline and three Texas
the standards and procedures for PUCO was concerned that changes in pipeline associations submitted
adequacy proceedings should be how PHMSA evaluates state excavation comments regarding how interstate
directed toward evaluating state damage prevention programs could pipeline operators are expected to be
enforcement programs, not specific result in a designation of a program treated under a state’s excavation
enforcement actions. INGAA holds that being ‘‘inadequate’’ or ‘‘nominally damage prevention program and noted
applying adequacy standards and adequate,’’ and that such a designation that PHMSA should provide
procedures to individual enforcement may affect funding and ultimately gas clarification in this regard. The issue
actions invites selective PHMSA pipeline safety. PUCO commented that they noted is whether the operator is
involvement contrary to vesting primary despite the stated assurance in the treated as an excavator or as an operator
enforcement responsibility with the ANPRM that funding for the and whether state agencies have the
states. Similarly, and consistent with development and implementation of authority to enforce state excavation
using adequacy proceedings to examine excavation damage prevention programs damage prevention standards on
programs instead of decisions, INGAA is ‘‘intended to be in addition to, and interstate pipeline operators or on
commented that PHMSA should specify independent of existing Federal funding excavators working near interstate
that inadequacy findings are not of the state pipeline safety programs,’’ pipelines. They consider this to be
retroactive—that a finding of the implications of designation of especially the case for states that have
inadequacy should not be used to revisit ‘‘inadequate’’ or ‘‘nominally adequate’’ not applied for, or been granted,
and alter a state’s enforcement findings on a state excavation damage prevention interstate agent status for natural gas
and sanctions. program’s current funding is not and/or hazardous liquid lines. Paiute
addressed. PUCO commented that it commented that authority for inspection
Response
would be beneficial for PHMSA to and enforcement of interstate pipelines
In determining a state program’s describe whether and how state funding pursuant to Federal regulations should
adequacy, PHMSA would evaluate a for the gas pipeline safety program will remain with PHMSA, and that in states
state’s overall damage prevention be affected by a determination of that don’t have interstate pipeline
enforcement program, but may evaluate ‘‘inadequate’’ or ‘‘nominally adequate.’’ inspection and enforcement authority,
past specific state enforcement actions the state should treat an interstate
during the evaluation process. PHMSA The three Texas pipeline associations
pipeline as an excavator, not a pipeline
did consider a system of addressing the noted that PHMSA should evaluate the
operator.
adequacy of state enforcement programs adequacy of state programs in a similar The three Texas pipeline associations
on an incident-by-incident basis instead fashion to that of PHMSA’s existing commented that there should be a
of through an annual review of the state state program evaluation. They process for states to clarify that they
enforcement programs. Under that commented that a state’s annual have the ability to enforce state
scenario, upon determining that program performance evaluation could excavation damage prevention
enforcement action in a given incident result in a reward of additional grant standards with regard to interstate
may deter future incidents, PHMSA monies or a penalty of a reduction in pipelines, through a statutory change or
would assess the state’s ability to grant moneys based on PHMSA’s through a Memorandum of
conduct effective enforcement in that excavation damage prevention law Understanding between PHMSA and the
particular incident and proceed with enforcement program assessment, to a states when certain program standards
enforcement action if PHMSA found the greater degree than is currently are met. Spectra Energy commented that
state program inadequate. However, practiced. the existing enforcement process in 49
PHMSA believes that such a system Response CFR Part 190 should continue to be
would be inefficient and applied to interstate pipeline operators.
administratively burdensome and that PHMSA intends to continue its
support of states seeking to develop and Response
an annual review may be more
appropriate. PHMSA seeks comment on enforce effective excavation damage States that have an annual
this issue. prevention programs through grants and certification under 49 U.S.C. 60105 have
other means. PHMSA has undertaken a authority to regulate the intrastate
Federal Funding variety of both qualitative and pipelines in that state covered by the
API, AOPL, TRA and WUCA quantitative initiatives that demonstrate certification. States that have an
commented that PHMSA should the effectiveness of existing state interstate agent agreement under 49
continue its assistance to state agencies excavation damage prevention U.S.C. 60106 may conduct inspections
seeking to develop and enforce effective programs. These initiatives are and investigations on interstate
excavation damage prevention programs described in the ANPRM pertaining to pipelines, but must refer any alleged
through grants and other support this rulemaking (http://www. violations on interstate pipelines to
mechanisms. They noted that this regulations.gov, Docket ID PHMSA– PHMSA for enforcement action. While
assistance should include providing 2009–0192). When evaluating a state’s states are generally preempted from
quantitative analyses that demonstrate overall pipeline safety program, PHMSA establishing or enforcing safety
the effectiveness of existing excavation will continue to consider the extent to standards for interstate pipelines, 49
damage prevention programs and which a state has implemented an U.S.C. 60104 contains a specific
developing incentives to ensure that effective excavation damage prevention provision that allows a state’s pipeline
agencies and other stakeholders in the enforcement program. The effect on base damage prevention one-call program to
states cooperate in these efforts. TRA grant funding of a declaration that a apply to interstate pipelines as well as
went on to comment that a state agency state’s excavation damage prevention intrastate pipelines.
that is making a concerted effort to make enforcement program is inadequate is Accordingly, all excavators and
changes to its excavation damage proposed in this NPRM. pipeline operators in a certified state are
generally subject to the requirements of that it is likely that if onerous state to have a documented excavation
that state’s excavation damage provisions are adopted in the proposed damage prevention program alone is not
prevention laws (except when explicitly rule, some states will simply defer to enough; it is critical for the state agency
exempted by state law). The Federal administrative enforcement, in to have the resources and the incentive
applicability of excavation damage which case NAPSR expects PHMSA will to exercise its authority, when
prevention requirements within a state undertake every action it would necessary.
is determined by that state’s law. Under otherwise expect a state to perform. In this regard, NAPSR commented
the provisions included in this NPRM, API and AOPL commented that state that an important factor to consider in
state excavation damage prevention excavation damage prevention program assessing the overall adequacy of a state
laws will continue to be enforced as evaluations should be based primarily excavation damage prevention program
specified by state laws except when on the effectiveness of the overall would be the relative weight given to
PHMSA deems a state’s enforcement programs in place and allow for the various proposed individual
program inadequate. In that case, flexibility in the statutory or regulatory assessment factors listed in the ANPRM.
PHMSA proposes to enforce the Federal language. They noted, for example, a NAPSR noted, for example, that
requirements established by this state program may be considered enforcement of excavation damage
rulemaking against excavators in that adequate if it has met the fundamental prevention laws has been shown to be
state who fail to comply with the requirements described in the an essential element of a successful
Federal requirements. Regardless of the introduction, but failed to meet other excavation damage prevention program.
status of a state’s damage prevention program elements required by PHMSA, The issuance of appropriate civil
program, PHMSA is proposing to retain as long as the state can demonstrate penalties has been a demonstrated
its existing enforcement authority over overall program effectiveness. They deterrent to non-compliant behavior.
pipeline operators and will continue to consider that an excavation damage When assessing the adequacy of
enforce the requirements related to prevention program that establishes a excavation damage prevention
excavation damage prevention (49 CFR generally acceptable baseline should programs, this factor could be given a
192.614 and 195.442) for pipeline provide an objective measuring stick. heavier weight than, for example,
operators it regulates. Panhandle Energy commented that a
exempting certain parties who perform
template or recommended practice for
Model Programs less risky excavations. Similarly, APGA
enforcement of excavation safety is
commented that some of the assessment
NAPSR, Missouri PSC, AGA and required, so that both PHMSA and the
factors should receive more weighting
several pipeline operators noted that states have a clear understanding of the
than others and that weighting should
care should be exercised about urging requirements, before any program
states to adopt concepts of what a be discussed with the affected parties.
evaluation takes place.
‘‘model’’ excavation damage prevention APGA noted that the ANPRM is a good
program should be. They cautioned that Response start in opening a dialogue with the
PHMSA should be open-minded in its As noted, PHMSA’s goal is to provide affected public, industry and state
review of state programs, allow for incentives to states to develop and governments.
alternate approaches for damage implement effective excavation damage With regard to weighting the
investigations, and not have prevention and enforcement programs. assessment factors, AGA commented
preconceived ideas on what an effective PHMSA believes there are some that the most important criteria are the
state excavation damage prevention fundamental components of effective ones involving timely reporting of
program should include. AGA and state enforcement programs. For pipeline damages, a universal
several operators noted that PHMSA example, an adequate enforcement requirement for all parties to notify the
should avoid taking a prescriptive program requires, at a minimum, the one-call center prior to excavation,
approach on the overall review of the existence of statutory enforcement establishment of a single agency
state’s excavation damage prevention authority that includes civil penalties responsible for oversight of excavation
enforcement process. They suggested for violations and the use of that damage prevention laws, and an
that PHMSA should adopt a holistic and authority. The criteria for evaluating effective enforcement process. AGA
data-driven approach to adequacy state enforcement programs proposed in noted that the list of criteria listed in the
assessment. For a state with this NPRM address those fundamental ANPRM appears thorough, but how the
documented success at excavation components (see proposed section criteria are weighted and actually
damage prevention, compliance with 198.55). evaluated is open to several different
specific PIPES Act criteria should be at approaches.
most a basis for suggested improvement. Evaluate the Entire State Program Michigan Consolidated Gas
They noted that a state program should NUCA commented that PHMSA commented that consideration should
never be deemed inadequate solely should evaluate each state’s excavation be given to states that are working on
because it did not meet all of these damage prevention program as a whole. revising their state laws.
criteria. Even if thorough enforcement exists in
Response
NAPSR noted that depending on how a particular state, if the program itself
its proposed provisions are interpreted, does not adequately address the nine Effective excavation damage
a program such as the one apparently elements of an effective excavation prevention law enforcement is critical to
envisioned by PHMSA in the ANPRM damage prevention program, the entire an effective excavation damage
could be burdensome and costly. program itself may be inadequate. If a prevention program, but enforcement is
NAPSR noted that PHMSA should not state’s excavation damage prevention just one component of an effective
presume that states can or will readily program and enforcement practices program. PHMSA has undertaken
change their laws in response to Federal were to focus exclusively on excavator several efforts to document state
initiatives, and should be mindful of responsibilities, that program is not excavation damage prevention programs
unintended consequences that may arise fully addressing excavation damage in their entirety. Information regarding
upon re-opening the existing state law prevention. AGA, APGA, and several those efforts is available at http://
to further amendments. NAPSR stated pipeline operators commented that for a primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm./
damagepreventionsummary.htm. resource allocation is critical in evaluations, or at the request of states as

However, the PIPES Act states: developing effective excavation damage appropriate. PHMSA does not believe
‘‘(f) LIMITATION.—The Secretary may not prevention programs because the addition of these evaluations will be
conduct an enforcement proceeding under inadequate reporting will result in a overly cumbersome. PHMSA also
subsection (d) for a violation within the failure to investigate incidents that proposes that states be given a five-year
boundaries of a state that has the authority should be investigated. Therefore, grace period after notification that their
to impose penalties described in section PHMSA encourages all states to develop enforcement programs have been
60134(b)(7) against persons who violate that effective excavation damage reporting deemed inadequate to address
state’s damage prevention laws, unless the requirements. The CGA Damage deficiencies in their programs before
Secretary has determined that the state’s Information Reporting Tool (DIRT) is an state pipeline safety base grant funding
enforcement is inadequate to protect safety, effective means of collecting data on
consistent with this chapter, and until the
levels are potentially affected. However,
Secretary issues, through a rulemaking
damages to pipelines and other PHMSA proposes that Federal
proceeding, the procedures for determining underground facilities. This is a excavation damage prevention
inadequate state enforcement of penalties.’’ voluntary filing requirement that can enforcement may take place at any time
assist in the collection of data on after a state’s enforcement program is
While evaluating state excavation damages. The data is made available to deemed inadequate. The process for
damage prevention programs in their the Federal government, states and the evaluating state enforcement programs
entirety is part of the annual review of public by the CGA. As provided in the is described in this NPRM.
a state’s overall pipeline safety program PIPES Act, this proposed rulemaking
performed by PHMSA in connection requires an excavator who causes Comments on Section IV Issues on
with the state grant process, this damage to a pipeline facility to report Which PHMSA Sought Comment
proposed rulemaking is focused solely the damage to the owner or operator of In Section IV of the ANPRM, pipeline
on the enforcement component. In this the facility promptly. operators, excavators, states and the
NPRM, PHMSA has proposed the public were urged to consider the
criteria for evaluating state excavation Perform Annual Reviews Only for State
appropriate procedures for determining
damage prevention law enforcement Enforcement Programs Deemed
the adequacy of state excavation damage
programs. Inadequate
prevention law enforcement programs,
PHMSA does not propose to weight AGA and several pipeline operators as well as the need for Federal
the criteria used in evaluating state commented that annual excavation administrative enforcement in the
excavation damage prevention law damage prevention program reviews are absence of an adequate state program.
enforcement programs. Weighting the not necessary for those states with PHMSA posed specific questions to
criteria could create an overly- adequate programs. They noted that it solicit stakeholder input. These
prescriptive set of criteria. PHMSA would be reasonable for PHMSA to included questions related to:
believes the proposed criteria are simple establish a five-year review cycle for A. Criteria for Determining the
enough to not warrant a specific scoring those states. Their basis is that a state’s Adequacy of SDP Enforcement
or weighting method. PHMSA overall program will change minimally Programs;
specifically asks for comments on over the course of a year and that an B. Administrative Process;
whether it should weight the criteria, annual audit of every program seems C. Federal Requirements for
how the critieria might be weighted, and unnecessary. From the standpoint of Excavators;
the rationale for weighting the criteria in administrative efficiency, it would be D. Adjudication Process; and
evaluating state excavation damage far better for PHMSA to lengthen its E. Existing Requirements Applicable
prevention law enforcement programs. review cycle for programs found to Owners and Operators of Pipeline
Evaluation of state enforcement adequate after an initial audit, and focus Facilities.
programs will pertain to state laws and its resources on the programs it found Many of the comments received were
regulations in effect at the time of inadequate or adequate subject to repetitious of those noted above under
evaluation. PHMSA believes that states specific corrective action. PHMSA General Comments.
should have the opportunity to should only perform annual reviews for A: Criteria for Determining the
demonstrate improvements in their states found to have a ‘‘nominally Adequacy of SDP Enforcement
enforcement programs and petition adequate’’ or inadequate program so that Programs
PHMSA for reevaluation of their these states have the opportunity to
programs as necessary and appropriate. have their status re-evaluated to identify In Section IV.A of the ANPRM,
areas for improvement and additional PHMSA noted that ‘‘a threshold
Damage Reporting criterion for determining the adequacy
emphasis.
Many commented that they do not JULIE, Inc. commented that there of a state’s damage prevention
support reporting all pipeline damages appears to be no probationary period or enforcement program will be whether
as this will create an unnecessary other opportunity for states to improve the state has established and exercised
burden on the operator, the state, and upon PHMSA’s recognized its authority to assess civil penalties for
PHMSA. Conversely, Northern Natural ‘‘deficiencies’’ prior to PHMSA violations of its one-call laws. PHMSA
Gas commented that excavators should undertaking enforcement actions. will likely consider the following issues
be required to report all pipeline in further evaluating the enforcement
damage to the affected pipeline Response component of [state damage prevention]
programs.’’ The ANPRM then listed 13
operator. PHMSA agrees that resources and

attention should be focused on state items for consideration and comment.
Response excavation damage prevention law Following are comments received
This proposed rulemaking does not enforcement programs that are deemed relative to those items:
address requirements for damage inadequate. However, PHMSA proposes Item 1: ‘‘Does state law contain
reporting by pipeline operators. that all SDP enforcement programs be requirements for operators to be
However, the reporting of damages that evaluated concurrently with PHMSA’s members of and participate in the
provides enough detail for analysis and annual state pipeline safety program state’s one-call system (similar to
current federal pipeline safety example, agricultural exemptions may from the one-call requirements certain
regulations, 49 CFR 192.614 and 49 CFR recognize the total impracticality of types of excavators, such as agriculture,
195.442)?’’ attempting to include normal farm railroads and state/county road
Several commented that Federal tillage. Others may conclude that the commissions. Spectra considers that to
pipeline safety regulations adequately risk of an activity is so low that provide exemptions is contrary to the
address this requirement for pipeline regulation is not justified, such as goal of pipeline safety, noting that the
operators. Several commenters also said opening a grave in a cemetery. Still pipeline operator is the most qualified
that each state excavation damage others may be the result of carefully entity to determine if a pipeline exists
prevention program should require all crafted legislative compromises to within the area of interest, to locate and
underground facilities operators to be achieve passage of one-call legislation, mark the facility, and to determine the
members of the state’s one-call the reopening of which could have safety precautions necessary to ensure
system(s). negative consequences. NAPSR also the pipeline is not impacted.
NUCA commented that noted that 49 U.S.C. 60114(d), which JULIE, Inc. expressed a concern that
‘‘participation’’ in excavation damage lists demolition, excavation, tunneling, some states’ cultures provide for the
prevention includes calling the one-call or construction, or excavation as successful existence of more than one
center before excavating. However, defined in paragraph 192.614(a), is far excavation damage prevention system
NUCA also commented that from all-inclusive, in that it seems to (one-call center) that does not have
underground facility operators being exclude farm tillage and gardening, and overlapping geographic areas. There
members of the appropriate one-call perhaps activities such as pipe or cable appears to be no process in the ANPRM
center is fundamental to the excavation plowing. NAPSR considers that PHMSA to recognize separate evaluation results
damage prevention process and that must determine to what extent certain in those states, particularly when
exemptions only increase the likelihood exemptions in individual states will be possibly one or both of the systems may
of facility damages. NUCA cites the acceptable. have unique but strong enforcement
Common Ground Study of One-Call AGA, along with Nicor, Paiute programs in place.
Systems and Damage Prevention Best Pipeline and Southwest Gas
Response
Practices, for which ‘‘the underlying Corporation, agreed that exemptions are
a critical consideration in evaluating the As noted in the response to the
premise for prevention of damage to General Comments above, some
underground facilities, and the adequacy of state excavation damage
prevention law enforcement programs. exemptions may be justifiable in some
foundation for this study, is that all states, especially where substantiated by
underground facility owners/operators They noted that exemptions are
inherently counter to the entire concept data. If having absolutely no exemptions
are members of one-call centers, and were a ‘‘pass/fail’’ criterion for
that it is always best to call before of excavation damage prevention being
a shared responsibility. They noted that evaluating state excavation damage
excavation.’’ prevention law enforcement programs,
Michigan Consolidated Gas in several states, exemptions have been
granted, for example, to state DOTs, PHMSA believes that nearly every state
questioned how the state and/or (if not all states) would be declared
PHMSA would take into account counties, municipalities, railroads, and
private land owners. The exemptions inadequate.
operators that do not have the resources, PHMSA does not propose an absolute
equipment, funding, etc., to locate their can take on different forms; some apply
so that the entity does not need to prohibition on exemptions from state
facilities. one-call damage prevention
belong to the one-call center for the
Response purpose of marking its underground requirements. States are ultimately
facilities, while others allow an entity to responsible for establishing the
Sections 192.614 and 195.442 of the
excavate freely without having to notify excavation damage prevention laws that
pipeline safety regulations require
the one-call center, and still others best suit their own circumstances.
regulated pipeline operators to be
allow certain parties to be free of PHMSA policy strongly encourages
members of qualified one-call systems
enforcement penalties. The commenting states to limit exemptions, for both
in the states in which they operate. All
organizations hold that exemptions excavators and utility owners/operators,
states certified to regulate gas operators
often exist only because of private from excavation damage prevention
will have adopted § 192.614 allowing laws to the extent practicable. To that
them to enforce it against the intrastate interests that enable certain entities to
escape responsibility in the excavation end, one of the criteria for determining
gas operators they regulate. the adequacy of state excavation damage
damage prevention process.
Items 2 and 3: ‘‘Does state law require prevention law enforcement programs
They also commented that
all excavators to use the state’s one-call proposed in this NPRM is ‘‘limited and
exemptions serve as an impediment
system and request that underground when stakeholders attempt to craft new justified’’ exemptions for excavators
utilities in the area of the planned legislation for state excavation damage from the requirements of state
excavation be located and marked prior prevention laws. They referred to the excavation damage prevention laws.
to digging? Has the state avoided giving DIMP Phase 1 Report (http:// In assessing state excavation damage
exemptions to its one-call damage primis.phmsa.dot.gov/dimp/docs/ prevention law enforcement programs,
prevention laws to state agencies, IntegrityManagementforGasDistribution PHMSA will assess all programs if the
municipalities, agricultural entities, Phase1Investigations2005.pdf), in state under evaluation has multiple
railroads, and other groups of commenting that all stakeholders must enforcement programs. In that case,
excavators?’’ PHMSA may declare one or more of the
participate in the excavation damage

NAPSR commented that the standards prevention process for it to be enforcement programs inadequate,
to which PHMSA would hold a state in successful. thereby allowing PHMSA to conduct
terms of ‘‘excavation’’ must be Spectra Energy commented that Federal administrative enforcement
consistent with the terms used in that PHMSA’s criteria should force states to actions in geographic areas covered by
state’s law. NAPSR noted that there may eliminate all exemptions from their one- the inadequate program.
be very legitimate reasons for call requirements. Spectra noted that a Item 4: ‘‘Are the state’s requirements
exemptions in a state one-call law. For number of states continue to exempt detailed and specific enough to allow
excavators to understand their three-year period between 2006 and picture of damage and prevention
responsibilities before and during 2008. needs. To whom operators should report
excavating in the vicinity of a pipeline?’’ was not addressed.
Response An additional comment received was
Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas PHMSA encourages states to utilize that PHMSA should clarify how
Corporation recommended that PHMSA plain language principles 6 when ‘‘damage’’ would be applied to the
extend this objective to include drafting their pipeline safety operator as an excavator, or operator’s
excavating in the vicinity of any regulations. At the same time, though, contract excavator and how this might
underground facility and supported PHMSA does not want to be overly be enforced.
PHMSA’s objective of states providing subjective in establishing criteria for NUCA commented that while
clarity to excavators to ensure that determining adequacy and PHMSA excavators are subject to extensive
detailed and specific information is continues to believe that states can and damage reporting requirements in most
available so they understand their should develop excavation damage state laws, the lack of state requirements
responsibilities before and during prevention laws that best suit their to report ‘‘near misses’’ obstructs efforts
excavation within the vicinity of a particular needs. Therefore, PHMSA is to provide accurate data trends. NUCA
pipeline. Similarly, AGL Resources not proposing to use the detail and considers that when underground
commented that this item is an specificity of state law as a criterion at facility operators fail to locate and mark
appropriate consideration when this time. However, PHMSA believes their lines accurately, that data should
determining the adequacy of a state’s that states should collect and manage be captured regardless of whether the
excavation damage prevention program, data that is detailed enough to facility was damaged. Even if reporting
and noted that ensuring that excavators demonstrate that excavators clearly of ‘‘near misses’’ is required by state
understand expectations and understand the requirements of state law, NUCA believes these requirements
consequences is an important aspect of excavation damage prevention laws. are rarely enforced.
promoting compliance. Item 5: ‘‘Are excavators required to Response
NAPSR commented that addressing report all pipeline damage incidents to
this criterion could be very subjective the affected pipeline operators?’’ Reporting pipeline damages to
and that specific criteria would be Many commenters considered this affected pipeline operators is an
needed for determining what is item to be essential in evaluating the essential component of pipeline safety.
‘‘detailed and specific enough.’’ They adequacy of state excavation damage To that end, PHMSA believes that states
noted that some states may have prevention law enforcement programs. must require that excavators report to
extensive regulations, while others may The TRA commented that mandatory pipeline operators all incidents that
have successful excavation damage reporting of damages to pipeline actually result in physical damage to
prevention programs with limited facilities should be a part of any pipelines as a criterion for evaluating a
regulatory intervention. effective excavation damage prevention state’s program. As noted above, states
program. AGA views this as one of the should also consider establishing
MidAmerican Energy Company
most important issues for evaluation criteria for operators in turn to report
commented that the detail and
and cited it as being included in the damage incidents to allow the state to
specificity of each state’s law need not
PIPES Act. AGA noted that the failure determine whether an investigation and
match the level of detail of the proposed
of excavators to notify the pipeline enforcement should be undertaken.
Federal requirements. They noted that
operator of damage promptly has Therefore, PHMSA is proposing, as part
there is value in allowing states to tailor
resulted in some significant pipeline of the criteria for determining the
their statutory and regulatory
ruptures involving fatalities, injuries, adequacy of a state’s program, that each
requirements to the specific
and property loss. AGA cited that past state has a reliable means for learning
circumstances presented in that state.
incidents have been a painful reminder about excavation damages to
They further noted that the level of
that just nicking the pipe coating or underground pipelines (see proposed
detail of responsibilities is best
cutting a cathodic protection wire can section 198.55).
determined by each situation, condition PHMSA agrees with the importance of
and scheme and operator requirements affect the long-term integrity of the pipe
damage reporting by all underground
for excavations on or near its and lead to a leak or rupture. Nicor
facility operators. However, PHMSA
underground facilities, given that commented that despite the
does not propose to use damage
underground pipelines are constructed requirement, excavators have waited up
reporting by operators as a criterion for
and operated in varied geographic to several hours before reporting
evaluating state enforcement programs.
locations such as remote wilderness, damages, thereby exacerbating
PHMSA has the authority to require
prairie, active agricultural lands, forests, circumstances. Nicor also cited
pipeline operators to report damages,
residential, commercial, industrial, and instances where excavators considered
but does not have the authority to
subsea environments. damage to be minor (coating knick or
require other utility operators to report
AGA considers that state broken tracer wire) and backfilled an
damages. PHMSA is concerned that this
requirements for most professionals in excavation prior to reporting it,
special requirement for pipeline
the excavation industry adequately requiring the operator to then re-expose
operators would be confusing for utility
convey the responsibilities involved in the area of reported damage to make
operators and cumbersome for the
proper excavation. However, it noted repairs. AGL Resources also commented
states.
that in addition to excavators reporting
excavators are often non-professionals With regard to the comment about

who do not understand safe digging damages to the operator, all utility PHMSA’s treatment of pipeline
practices or even the importance of operators should be required to report operators as excavators, PHMSA’s
notifying the one-call center. AGA noted damages to provide a more complete existing regulations at 49 CFR 192.614
that according to CGA’s 2008 DIRT 6 Further information on plain language
and 195.442 address these issues.
Report, occupants and farmers have principles can be found in Federal guidance here:
PHMSA is not proposing to require
been the excavator in 8 to 10 percent of http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/ reporting pipeline excavation damage
the damage reports collected over the memoranda/2011/m11-15.pdf. near-misses at this time. While data on
near-misses would be valuable in through state one-call centers and injuries, fatalities, or environmental
guiding state excavation damage operators’ public awareness programs, damage, which may not be known for
prevention program improvements, this and the practice may best be achieved days, are generally included on a
proposed rule pertains specifically to through best practices and not through written report form filed with the
excavators who actually damage Federal or state regulations. appropriate agency, within 30 days or
PHMSA regulated pipelines. In less in accordance with state or Federal
Response
addition, this requirement could impose requirements. They noted that for
a significant cost on excavators. The PIPES Act requires excavators to interstate pipelines not subject to state
However, there is nothing stopping a promptly call the 911 emergency jurisdiction, PHMSA has requirements
state from adopting more stringent telephone number if damage to a for reporting incidents that meet certain
reporting requirements such as pipeline results in the escape of any criteria. The requirements include an
including near-misses. PHMSA seeks flammable, toxic, or corrosive gas or initial notification deadline and a
comments on the potential cost impacts liquid that may endanger life or cause documented incident report deadline.
of requiring reporting of pipeline serious bodily harm or damage to NAPSR inquired whether PHMSA is
excavation damage near-misses. property. PHMSA understands that going to require that all reports be sent
Item 6: ‘‘Does state law contain a excavators are often required to to PHMSA, or that specific reports be
provision requiring that 911 be called if reimburse 911 centers for the cost of made available upon request, and
a pipeline damage incident causes a dispatching emergency response commented that if PHMSA wants
release of hazardous products?’’ personnel to a damage site. Therefore, reports of all damages, it should simply
AGA and several gas pipeline PHMSA proposes that states require require the operators report directly to
operators commented that some states excavators to call 911 in these instances, PHMSA instead of placing an additional
may adopt statutory language that does but is proposing to permit the excavator burden on the states.
not exactly match the Federal to exercise discretion as to whether to
request that the 911 operator dispatch Response
legislation. For example, a state may
emergency response personnel to the For a state to have an effective
adopt language that affords pipeline
damage site. However, the 911 operator excavation damage prevention
operators some latitude so that they do
will always have the discretion to enforcement program, the enforcement
not need to dial 911 if they damage their
dispatch emergency response personnel. authority must have a reliable
own pipeline. Since operating personnel
Item 7: ‘‘Has the responsible state mechanism for learning about
are already on the jobsite, AGA and the
agency established a reliable excavation damage incidents. The
commenting companies agree that
mechanism to ensure that it receives details of how this mechanism
operators should not be required to dial
reports of pipeline damage incidents on functions, however, may vary
911 if they cause damage to their own
a timely basis?’’ considerably from state-to-state. For
pipeline that results in a release that the
Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas example, some state law may require
operators can safely control without the
Corporation commented that states that mandatory reporting of excavation
aid of emergency response personnel
do not have interstate pipeline damages, while other states use
prior to making the necessary repair.
Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas inspection and enforcement authority complaint-based systems of reporting
Corporation also commented that this should treat an interstate pipeline damages. Because PHMSA must
provision should apply only if the operator as an excavator, not a pipeline evaluate state enforcement programs,
damage may endanger life or cause operator. They consider that authority PHMSA’s goal is to assess how states
serious bodily harm or damage to for inspection and enforcement of learn of excavation damages and how
property, and results in the escape of interstate pipelines should remain with this mechanism drives enforcement
any flammable, toxic or corrosive gas, PHMSA and no reporting of pipeline decisions, which has an effect on the
and that all releases of natural gas do damage to the state is needed. adequacy of states’ enforcement
not need to be reported by making a 911 Southwest Gas Corporation programs. PHMSA will not be collecting
phone call. They noted that PHMSA commented that if PHMSA desires state damage reports, but may review
should distinguish between natural gas individual incident report information them during evaluation of the state’s
and other gases or liquids instead of on non-Federally reported incidents program.
trying to include all of these under the from the states, PHMSA should Item 8: ‘‘Does the responsible state
umbrella of ‘‘hazardous products.’’ recommend establishing a reporting agency conduct investigations of all
NAPSR commented that with regard time period with the state agencies. excavation damage to pipeline incidents
to calling 911, the question should be Southwest Gas Corporation noted that to to determine whether the excavator
whether the excavator by law—or eliminate any increased burden on the appropriately used the one-call system
appropriate regulation—is required to state agency, PHMSA should consider to request a facility locate, whether a dig
notify local emergency responders and/ specific criteria levels for those state- ticket was generated, how quickly the
or law enforcement if a release of only reportable incidents of which they pipeline operator responded, whether
product poses a danger to the public. want notification. the pipeline operator followed all of its
NAPSR anticipates that where 911 is Paiute and Southwest Gas applicable written procedures, whether
available the excavator would most Corporation also commented that the excavator waited the appropriate
likely use it to make that notice, but notification requirements are different time for the facilities to be located and
marked, whether the pipeline operator’s
considers that it should not be necessary than reporting requirements. They noted
for state law to specify that method if that state and Federal reporting markings were accurate, and whether
the desired end is achieved. NAPSR requirements provide initial notification the digging was conducted in a
noted that state laws may predate the to the respective agency within a very responsible manner?’’
advent of 911 emergency call systems, short time (usually one to two hours) NAPSR commented that the listing of
and therefore would not specify that 911 after discovery. The extent of product anticipated review items during an
must be called. NAPSR also noted that release, service interruptions, product excavation damage incident
calling 911 is generally promoted loss, property damage, evacuations, investigation may be helpful during
investigation of an event reportable as a Æ ‘‘Whether the digging was reportable incidents as defined in 49
pipeline incident or accident. However, conducted in a responsible manner’’— CFR Part 191 because it would not be
it is unrealistic to expect an Would this require a field investigation reasonable to expect operators and/or
investigation of this magnitude into including interviews with the foreman, state agencies to investigate and report
each and every event where a pipeline operator and laborers? Can the results of in this detail on all excavation damage
is damaged. NAPSR considers that the the investigation by the operator be events. APGA noted that some lesser
resources required would exceed those considered as fact? If it is ascertained level of reporting may be considered for
of entire state pipeline safety programs, that best practices were not followed, events that do not meet the reportable
and noted that PHMSA is considering would this constitute a ‘‘violation’’? incident criteria. Nicor suggested that
these regulations at a time when many What are the essential elements of an states should have a process for
states are suffering financial hardship ‘‘investigation’’? determining which reported excavation
and their pipeline safety programs are NAPSR also commented that all DOT- damages will be investigated. APGA
struggling to remain afloat. Other reportable excavation damage incidents also noted that under the Distribution
commenters repeated this consideration. should be investigated. However, it Integrity Management Programs (DIMP)
NAPSR commented that the following noted that there are many thousands of rule, operators will annually report the
listed items should be clarified and that, DOT non-reportable incidents each year number of excavation damages to
to the extent that any of them are that involve superficial damage and no PHMSA, and that these reports could
incorporated into Federal regulations, escaping gas. NAPSR considers that a also be made available to states.
PHMSA should clarify its intent and one-size-fits-all investigation approach Southwest Gas Corporation
expectation for each item: is not practical, and that the extent of commented that if PHMSA means only
Æ ‘‘Whether the excavator investigation of non-reportable reportable incidents (as defined by each
appropriately used the one-call system incidents should be on a state-by-state state) that result from excavation
to request a facility locate’’—Does basis, left to the discretion of the damage, then determining the
having a ticket number suffice? responsible state agency. The state effectiveness of the state excavation
Æ ‘‘Whether the excavator should be allowed to adopt a basis for damage prevention program should
appropriately used the one-call system investigation, such as establishing include a review of all excavation
to request a facility locate’’—Does one thresholds, or perform periodic damage, not just excavation damage to
need to determine if the site was pre- sampling coupled with enforcement pipelines, and include analysis of any
marked? proceedings on the incidents sampled, trends and areas for improvement.
so a deterrent effect is achieved. NUCA commented that states must
Æ ‘‘Whether the dig ticket was NAPSR further commented that it ensure that those conducting damage
generated’’—Does having the ticket may be possible that the PHMSA Office investigations look at the entire
number suffice? [Or] Does transmission of Pipeline Safety Failure Investigation excavation damage prevention process,
of the ticket to operators need to be Policy document will play a role in from the excavator notifying the one-call
confirmed? connection with this aspect of the center to the facility operator providing
Æ ‘‘How quickly the pipeline operator proposed rulemaking. NAPSR, accurate and timely markings, to safe
responded’’—Is the question here therefore, suggested that this policy be excavation and backfill practices by the
whether the operator responded within considered along with other factors excavator. NUCA believes that the
the time frame allowed by the law or before formalizing a notice of proposed ANPRM adequately addressed the
regulation in that state? And, would this rulemaking. factors needed to be investigated, but
information be relevant if the incident AGA commented that the evaluation that several state authorities fail to
cause is that the facilities were marked process should recognize those states fulfill their investigative responsibilities
and excavation practices were that have adopted some basis for in all areas of excavation damage
insufficient? investigation. The basis could be event prevention, especially with regard to
Æ ‘‘Whether the pipeline operator significance or it could investigate some locating and marking of facilities.
followed all of its applicable written subset of the damages, such as state
procedures’’—Would this require a field reportable incidents. AGA noted that it Response
audit and review of the operator’s is not feasible for a state agency to PHMSA’s primary interest with regard
(employee or contract) locator on the conduct a formal investigation for every to pipeline damage investigations is to
site of the incident? occurrence of excavation damage to ensure that state enforcement is fair and
Æ ‘‘Whether the excavator waited the pipelines in a state. AGA also balanced and is targeted to the at-fault
appropriate time for the facilities to be commented that most importantly, the party in an excavation damage incident.
located and marked’’—Would this state should have a mechanism that PHMSA recognizes that states have
require verifying that all utilities had enables all stakeholders to express resource issues to contend with and
marked the site prior to the excavator formal concerns and complaints with need the ability to focus investigatory
performing the work? [Or] Would non-compliant parties, citing, for resources on significant incidents as
comparing the start date on the ticket to instance, that excavators should have a opposed to minor incidents. PHMSA
the incident date suffice? process to file complaints against intends to address this consideration in
Æ ‘‘Whether the pipeline operator’s utilities that fail to mark their facilities determining the adequacy of
markings were accurate’’—Would this accurately or on time. Additionally, enforcement programs by reviewing
require field verification of the marks? pipeline operators should have a state enforcement records and the
If yes, how much delay can be justified process to file complaints or seek adequacy of the investigations that
in an excavator’s downtime while the injunctions against excavators who preceded enforcement actions. In
marks are being verified? Can the word either fail to notify the one-call center, addition, PHMSA intends to assess
of the operator and excavator be taken fail to respect the markings or fail to states’ incident investigation practices
as fact? Can an emergency locate be wait the required time before beginning to ensure their adequacy in determining
performed and excavation activities excavation activity. the at-fault party in an excavation
resumed before arrival of a government APGA commented that this damage incident involving a pipeline
inspector on site? consideration should apply only to subject to PHMSA pipeline safety
regulations. PHMSA does not intend to investigate, hold hearings, document PHMSA does not intend to address
use PHMSA’s Failure Investigation findings, etc., for every violation found impacts to pipeline safety grant funding
Policy as a model for assessing the or complaint filed especially if this levels for states with excavation damage
adequacy of state damage incident includes non-regulated or non-pipeline law enforcement programs PHMSA
investigation practices. entities? deems adequate.
Item 9: ‘‘Does the state’s damage The PST commented that if PHMSA Item 10: ‘‘Has the state designated a
prevention law provide enforcement is going to ascertain whether the state agency with responsibility for
authority including the use of civil amounts of civil penalties assessed administering the damage prevention
penalties, and are the maximum reflect the seriousness of the incident, laws?’’
penalties similar to the federal then PHMSA must develop a set of
guidelines that sets out each type of Marathon Pipeline commented that a
maximums (see 49 U.S.C. 60122(a))?’’ state agency should be responsible for
With regard to the amount of the civil offense and the range of penalties that
PHMSA deems appropriate. PST noted receiving and investigating reports of
penalty, PUCO noted that the ANPRM pipeline damage and near miss
that this will also help to provide clarity
does not indicate how large state incidents caused by excavation. Paiute
regarding the question in the ANPRM
maximum civil penalties would have to Pipeline agrees that the agency
about whether a state program’s civil
be in order to be considered ‘‘similar’’ responsible for administering the
penalties ‘‘are the maximum penalties
to Federal maximums or the excavation damage prevention laws
similar to the Federal maximums.’’
appropriateness of Federal maximum The several Texas pipeline should be designated in states where
penalties against non-gas pipeline associations commented that a excavation damage prevention laws
excavators. NAPSR commented that for substantial portion of state grant monies exist. Echoing this comment, the Texas
pipeline operators some states’ fines are should be tied to enforcement and pipeline associations commented that
equal to the Federal maximums, but that collection of substantial civil penalties the first criterion for a state should be
for excavators, fines may vary from for failure to comply with a state one- a single state agency designated to
small amounts per violation and call law that is found to be adequate. oversee the state’s underground
gradually increase, depending on the They also suggested that penalties excavation damage prevention program.
circumstances, with no maximum. related to excavation damage prevention They noted that a state agency must not
NAPSR noted that in practice, some being collected by states should be only be designated as the agency
states have found that an administrative dedicated to pipeline safety, and not responsible for the program, but must
process with modest fines (i.e., large just the general revenue fund. also have the authority to enforce the
enough to have a financial impact on Spectra Energy Transmission safety standards to protect underground
the offender) works well. The larger the commented that PHMSA’s criteria facility operators, excavators, and the
fine, the harder it is to collect and the should consider a state’s historical public.
collection process tends to consume a enforcement action against excavators Going further, AGA and AGL
lot of the state agency’s resources. that fail to place one-call tickets prior to Resources commented that effective
NAPSR also commented that in state excavating or fail to adhere to the excavation damage prevention requires
legislatures, the authorized amount of a mandatory waiting period following more than merely designating a state
civil penalty can be a serious issue. one-call notification. Spectra also agency with responsibility for
Legislatures may be reluctant to approve commented that states should take administering the excavation damage
penalties so high that small companies enforcement action against intrastate prevention laws. They noted that
could be put out of business, noting that pipeline or distribution system although many states have agencies that
although the assessed penalty does not operators that fail to respond to one-call have been delegated authority for
have to be the maximum, the possibility tickets or fail to properly locate or mark administering the excavation damage
remains a concern. NAPSR notes that their facilities. They noted that penalties prevention laws, often the state agency
the penalties incorporated in state laws should escalate for repeated violations has not been given either the personnel,
may be the product of laborious and and that the existence of repeat financial resources, or the incentives
protracted negotiations—and the violations may signal a weakness of needed to exercise its authority. The
penalties provided for in 49 U.S.C. deterrents and need for PHMSA action. three Texas pipeline associations
60122 are quite high by many state commented that the adequacy of
standards. NAPSR notes that there is no Response
funding should be documented and
evidence that state penalties must be While state civil penalty levels must reported by the states through several
comparable to Federal penalties for state be high enough to deter violations, basic data elements. Such elements
enforcement to be effective, and that if PHMSA recognizes that states will often could include items like ratio of
such a comparison must be a be conducting enforcement against reported damages to calls, numbers of
consideration it should be a minor one. smaller entities. Therefore, penalty damages reported per mile and number
MidAmerican Energy commented that levels lower than the Federal levels may of enforcement actions completed.
the amount of the maximum civil be sufficient to achieve deterrence. There may be better measures of
penalty that may be assessed may not be Accordingly, PHMSA does not propose enforcement effectiveness, but whatever
the critical factor in evaluating a state’s to require states to assess civil penalties is used must demonstrate that
enforcement program. Instead, the at a level equal to Federal civil enforcement is occurring.
aggressiveness and consistency by penalties. PHMSA’s primary interest AGL Resources also commented that
which a state investigates and enforces with regard to state civil penalties is a state should establish, designate and
the excavation damage prevention laws that (1) civil penalty authority exists utilize an ‘‘advisory type’’ committee
may be a more effective gauge. Michigan within the state, and (2) civil penalty made up of the various stakeholders as
Consolidated Gas noted that authority is used by the state the responsible state agency.
consideration should be made regarding consistently enough to deter violation of
a state’s funding and resources to state excavation damage prevention Response
administer its enforcement program, i.e., laws. PHMSA seeks comments on this PHMSA’s primary interest in this area
does the state have the manpower to issue. is assessing whether a state has a
designated excavation damage being informed of every investigation Nicor commented that the state’s one-
prevention law enforcement authority to and enforcement decision of every state, call statute should set forth aggravating
act as the lead in law enforcement cases. it would be more effective for PHMSA or mitigating factors in determining the
That authority needs to establish a close to recommend specific criteria levels for civil penalty. They also commented that
working relationship with the state being informed of investigations and when considering a history of
pipeline investigators and develop a enforcement decisions. noncompliance, excavator violations
familiarity with the state’s pipeline should not aggravate the penalty
Response
safety and damage prevention laws and calculation for locating and marking
requirements. Once that authority PHMSA will be reviewing state violations, and vice versa, and that
begins to take enforcement action enforcement records to help assess penalty assessments should be
consistently, PHMSA will be interested whether states that have enforcement transparent to all excavators.
to learn whether the state enforcement authority are actually using their Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas
authority has adequate resources to authority and how they are using their Corporation commented that PHMSA’s
perform its mission. In addition, authority. PHMSA believes that states evaluation of a state’s enforcement
PHMSA’s periodic review of states’ should be able to explain the reasons program should consider whether the
damage prevention enforcement records behind their decisions as to whether or state has the ability to exercise its
performed under the state certification not to take enforcement action, but is authority to assess civil penalties and
process will provide PHMSA with not necessarily seeking access to whether it is fair and consistent in doing
information on the adequacy of privileged and confidential information. so. They also noted that not all damage
enforcement resources. Item 12: ‘‘With respect to cases where incidents warrant financial penalties,
Committees comprised of enforcement action is taken, is the state and PHMSA should not limit its review
representatives of all excavation damage actually exercising its civil penalty to only penalties of a financial nature.
prevention stakeholders that advise authority? Does the amount of the civil They acknowledged that civil penalties
enforcement agencies may help to penalties assessed reflect the are part of an effective excavation
ensure fair and balanced excavation seriousness of the incident? Are damage prevention program; however,
damage prevention law enforcement. remedial orders given to the violator they commented that in some states
However, PHMSA does not believe that legally enforceable?’’ excavation damage prevention training
advisory committees should have a AGA, API and AOPL supported the has been effectively mandated in lieu of
‘‘veto’’ on enforcement decisions made focus on utilization of civil penalties to civil penalties.
by responsible officials and PHMSA enforce excavation damage prevention Response
also believes that advisory committees laws. API and AOPL supported
are not the only effective means of PHMSA’s proposed threshold criteria to PHMSA’s primary interests with
ensuring fair and balanced enforcement. determine whether a state has regard to state civil penalties for
PHMSA, therefore, does not propose to established and exercised authority to violations of excavation damage
use as a criterion whether states utilize assess civil penalties for violation of prevention law are that: (1) Civil penalty
advisory committees in assessing the one-call laws. They noted that most of authority exists within the state, and 2)
adequacy of states’ enforcement the other criteria listed in the ANPRM the state uses civil penalty authority to
programs. derive from these criteria and deter violation of state excavation
Item 11: ‘‘Does the state official demonstrate that laws are in place and damage prevention laws. PHMSA
responsible for determining whether or being enforced. proposes to assess these two factors
not to proceed with enforcement action AGA and others, including several through a review of state law/regulation
document the reasons for the decision pipeline operators, commented that and records of past enforcement actions.
in a transparent and accountable fines and penalties should be significant PHMSA does not intend to hold states
manner? Are the records of these enough to affect behaviors, yet they to an overly-prescriptive construct of
investigations and enforcement should not be so high that they give civil penalty authority or to an overly-
decisions made available to PHMSA?’’ excavators incentive to be deceitful or prescriptive civil penalty fee schedule.
NAPSR commented that in some fearful of reporting damages due to the Sanctions other than civil penalties may
jurisdictions this would be privileged potential repercussions. They consider have the desired effect of deterring non-
information not subject to disclosure. It that fines and penalties should escalate compliant behavior. State excavation
also noted that a decision on whether to for repeat and willful violators, damage prevention enforcement records
take formal enforcement action is a particularly those who have a history of should be made available to the public
decision on whether to prosecute; thus, being counseled on the importance of to the extent practicable. PHMSA seeks
the concept of ‘‘prosecutorial adhering to all safe digging laws and comment on these issues.
discretion’’ may apply. NAPSR also practices. They also commented that the Item 13: ‘‘Are annual statistics on the
inquired about what kind of maximum fine or penalty for any number of excavation damage incidents,
documentation would be expected. Federal administrative enforcement investigations, enforcement actions,
Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas actions taken within state jurisdiction penalties proposed, and penalties
Corporation commented that should be no more than the maximum collected by the state made available to
transparency and consistency are amount cited in the state law, even if PHMSA and the public?’’
important to an effective enforcement that state’s enforcement has been AGA agreed that statistics are useful
program. They consider that states deemed inadequate. They commented to understand trends and areas
should be responsible for documenting that maximum penalties in 49 U.S.C. deserving attention, that past
and recording investigations, decisions, 60122(a) should not be used for enforcement actions are one barometer
and enforcement actions taken or not excavation damage prevention law of the enforcement activity in the state,
taken to ensure consistency in decisions enforcement as they are excessive for and that past reports of enforcement
and enforcement actions with all excavation damage prevention programs against excavators should be reviewed
excavators. They also commented that and can have adverse unintended for the type of excavator that is being
PHMSA should consider if instead of consequences. fined or penalized. AGA also
commented that other items should be singled out for incidents that were Clarification
considered to determine whether or not caused by others, such as mismarked PST and several other commenters
enforcement has been active and utilities and failure to address utilities noted that state excavation damage
effective, but noted that many states during the design process, and that prevention programs apply to many
only collect data on excavation damages PHMSA should determine what are utilities besides pipelines, and that it is
involving natural gas pipelines. AGA appropriate ‘‘annual stats on damage unclear from the ANPRM whether a
commented that each state should be incidents’’ to report to the public. state’s entire excavation damage
expected to establish some clear, prevention program, including other
API and AOPL commented that the
minimum reporting guidelines for the utilities such as waterlines, sewer,
reporting requirements suggested as a
state enforcement agency, but that
basis for evaluation could have the electric, etc., will be judged or whether
PHMSA should not expect the various
effect of requiring duplicate (or even PHMSA will only review how
state reporting guidelines to be uniform.
NAPSR commented that although triplicate) reporting for pipeline excavation damage prevention is
annual statistics are important, PHMSA operators and/or other regulated working for pipelines. PST commented
should not place much emphasis on entities. They noted that given that that it is also unclear whether PHMSA
comparing the states against each other recently proposed revisions to PHMSA’s intends to expand its authority to
on the basis of these parameters. It own accident and incident reports include damage to utilities other than
noted that there is bound to be (7000.1 and 7000.2) would collect, and pipelines, and if not, what effect
significant variability between the states CGA’s DIRT report already collects, PHMSA’s selective enforcement of only
due to factors including, but not limited significant information about excavation the part of the program regarding
to, the volume of excavation activity in damage incidents, PHMSA should pipelines will have on a state’s more
the state, the density of the underground consider changing the reporting comprehensive excavation damage
infrastructure, the number of one-call requirements by which a state program prevention program. Will states be
centers, the resources available to the is judged to allow for the use of the CGA driven to create two separate excavation
entity in charge of enforcement, and the or PHMSA data. Similarly, the WUCA damage prevention programs? What
political climate in the state with commented that state agencies and would be the unintended consequences
respect to the prevailing preference as to PHMSA should explore means to share of not regulating utilities other than
what the excavation damage prevention pipelines? Similarly, the TRA
reported information electronically
law should cover. commented that the proposed rule
rather than imposing additional
Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas should distinguish between enforcing
reporting requirements.
Corporation commented that having one-call laws and pipeline facility
data available to the public is not the The Michigan Public Service excavation damage prevention. TRA
standard for which a state’s program Commission (PSC) commented that noted that one-call laws in many states
should be judged. They consider that reportable information should include cover many different types of utilities,
damage incident investigations, the nature of the incident, the cause of and that it appears that a state may meet
enforcement actions, and penalties the incident, the extent of service the requirements stated in the PIPES Act
proposed or collected should not be interruptions, property damage, by enforcing pipeline facility excavation
provided to the general public without evacuations, injuries and fatalities, and damage prevention without exercising
providing a clear and concise that product loss would be factored into the same level of authority over other
description of the information, as most the total dollar amount of the incident. underground utilities, such as water,
of the general public has limited sewer, telecommunications and
Response
knowledge of, or experience with, the electricity.
information that would be provided. Variability among the states makes it PST also commented that it concurs
Nicor commented that statistics difficult to seek standardized with the general criteria set out in the
collected should include damages by all information pertaining to excavation ANPRM for determining whether a
excavators and on all facilities, not just damage incidents, investigations, state’s enforcement program is adequate,
pipelines. Paiute and Southwest Gas enforcement actions, penalties and the use of the nine elements from
Corporation noted that data from the proposed, and penalties collected. the PIPES Act as a foundation for
CGA DIRT could be used for analyzing Variability also makes it difficult to excavation damage prevention law
excavation damages; however, compare state enforcement programs. enforcement programs. However, it
providing damage information to DIRT PHMSA does, however, propose under noted that PHMSA also needs to
is not mandated in all states. criterion 3 that availability of this type consider and clarify:
NUCA commented that timely 1. Whether each criterion is of equal
of information to the general public be
gathering of damage data is important, importance or if a relative weight
a factor in evaluating state enforcement
as is the type of information collected. should be assigned to each;
programs because public understanding
However, NUCA considers that damages 2. Whether the failure of a state to
and involvement of state enforcement
incurred by the excavator should be meet a single criterion results in the
can help to drive more effective
collected as well. This should include state’s damage prevention program
enforcement.
costs to the excavator in cases where a being inadequate; and,
facility is hit because of a failure to Additional Comments Related to 3. Whether the failure to meet certain
locate and mark facilities accurately in Section IV.A ‘‘core’’ criteria or attain a ‘‘passing’’
a timely fashion, including any damage score (based on relative weights of each
to the excavator’s equipment or Commenters were also invited to criterion) will trigger an ‘‘inadequacy’’
property, and any downtime incurred comment on additions and alternatives determination.
by the excavator while the true location to the items listed in the ANPRM, as
noted above, that may be equally Response
of underground facilities is determined.
Washington Transportation Builders suitable for the purpose of evaluating PHMSA proposes to review the
Association commented that its industry the adequacy of state excavation damage adequacy of states’ excavation damage
is concerned that contractors will be prevention law enforcement programs. prevention law enforcement programs.
However, PHMSA’s regulatory authority their existing excavation damage enforcement intervention should not
extends only to pipelines subject to prevention programs or to implement occur prior to a state being audited and
PHMSA’s pipeline safety regulations. programs to include effective provided an opportunity to improve on
PHMSA does not have the authority to enforcement through the use of civil any deficiencies.
enforce Federal excavation damage penalties. NAPSR expressed the view that most
prevention standards in cases of damage of the items listed in the ANPRM are
Criteria for Review of SDP Enforcement subjective and that additional
to underground utilities other than
Programs examination of the assessment factors
pipelines. Despite PHMSA’s limited
regulatory authority, PHMSA believes AGC of Texas recommended that may be required to further eliminate
that if states implement effective when evaluating the adequacy of a some of the subjectivity. Alternatively,
enforcement programs that are driven by state’s excavation damage prevention they suggested there may be need to
the goal of preventing excavation program, PHMSA should include develop some non-mandatory guidance
damage to pipelines, other utilities and criteria for a mandatory positive to provide added detail.
excavation damage prevention response system, which requires PST commented that if PHMSA
stakeholders will benefit. PHMSA does operator and excavator participation, decides to create a situation where a
not intend for states to develop separate enforceable with penalties. state can be found to have a program
excavation damage prevention programs The WUCA commented that state that is ‘‘nominally adequate,’’ PHMSA
for pipelines and other utilities. excavation damage prevention law needs to define clearly what this means
PHMSA proposes in this notice to use enforcement processes should include and how a state can achieve an
seven criteria to evaluate state an appeals process that includes an ‘‘adequate’’ status. PST’s preference
enforcement programs. PHMSA, appeals board with members who have would be for PHMSA to clearly
however, will not take a one-size-fits-all adequate knowledge of design and communicate possible areas where
approach. Because of the wide construction administration processes, improvements could be made in a
variability among state enforcement allowing them to assign responsibility to state’s program rather than to create a
programs, PHMSA believes these the appropriate party. They commented hard to define status of ‘‘nominally
reviews must take into account the that failure to assign responsibility to adequate.’’ They encouraged PHMSA to
experiences of each state and limit the appropriate parties, such as create criteria that are clear enough that
comparison between state programs. operators, one-call centers, locators and a state’s program is either adequate or
PHMSA’s primary goal in evaluating design engineers, creates uncontrollable inadequate.
the adequacy of state excavation damage risk for contractors. Spectra Energy commented that
prevention law enforcement programs is API and AOPL commented that PHMSA criteria should weigh whether
to seek clear evidence that: PHMSA should establish clear state excavation damage prevention
• State laws/regulations are adequate guidelines and criteria for determining laws include requirements for
to protect underground infrastructure which state excavation damage excavators to notify the state and the
from excavation damage; prevention programs are effective and pipeline operator if they damage a
• The state has a designated authority effectively enforced, and noted that pipeline during excavation and whether
responsible for enforcement of the these criteria should be based on enforcement procedures exist for
excavation damage prevention law; transparent data, where available, but instances of non-compliance.
• The enforcement authority has a should not impose additional data TRA commented that the threshold
reliable means of learning about collection on the states. AGA noted that criterion for evaluating the adequacy of
excavation damage incidents and the most important criteria are the ones a state’s excavation damage prevention
possible violations of state excavation involving timely reporting of pipeline program should include the lack of
damage prevention law; and, damages, a universal requirement for all exemptions to the state’s excavation
• Enforcement authority is exercised parties to notify the one-call center prior damage prevention laws, such as
effectively, including the use of civil to excavation, establishment of a single exemptions for state agencies,
penalties, to ensure compliance with agency responsible for oversight of municipalities, agricultural entities,
state excavation damage prevention law. excavation damage prevention laws, and railroads, and other groups of
There are multiple ways a state can an effective enforcement process. AGA excavators. TRA cautioned, however,
meet the more subjective criteria. also commented that the criteria that it, and likely other state regulatory
Reviews of state enforcement programs regarding the evaluation of state agencies, does not have authority to
would entail detailed conversations programs, as listed in the ANPRM, make changes to the state pipeline
with excavation damage prevention appears thorough, but acknowledged excavation damage prevention law. To
stakeholders at the state level and must that how the criteria are weighted and minimize exemptions, much effort and
allow for some flexibility to permit a actually evaluated is open to several time must be expended to reach
thorough and accurate review of state different approaches. consensus regarding the entities to be
enforcement programs. Several commenters expressed exempted and to determine the extent of
PHMSA strongly believes that support for the need and intent of the an exemption. While TRA agrees with
excavation damage prevention law proposed rulemaking, the development the threshold criteria noted in the
enforcement is a state responsibility. of criteria by which to evaluate state ANPRM, TRA asserted that as part of
Overly prescriptive Federal criteria for excavation damage prevention the evaluation to determine the
the review of state enforcement programs, and Federal administrative adequacy of a state’s enforcement of its
programs would be counter to this enforcement, if needed, when state pipeline excavation damage prevention
principle. This rulemaking is intended enforcement is deemed inadequate. law, the state’s record of progress in
to provide limited, backstop Federal EPPG commented that a ‘‘standard strengthening its law should be
administrative enforcement authority model’’ for enforcement of excavation considered. Every effort should be made
regarding excavation damage to safety is needed to ensure existing state to allow a state to continue working
pipelines in states PHMSA finds to have programs are not audited against with stakeholders to improve pipeline
inadequate enforcement programs and unsettled standards. However, EPPG excavation damage prevention laws
to encourage those states to enhance commented that Federal administrative without Federal intervention.
AGA commented that PHMSA should likely provide for an opportunity for the The Greater Chicago Damage
build flexibility into how it applies the state to petition for reconsideration of Prevention Council commented that it
performance criteria for the 13 criteria the decision, and would likely allow the endorses the development and
listed in the ANPRM. AGA noted that state to show later that it has improved implementation of best practices to
several of the items listed do not lend its excavation damage prevention law prevent damage to pipelines and other
themselves to a simple rating or score, enforcement program to an adequate underground facilities, but that it
or even a definitive ‘yes’ or ‘no’ level and request that PHMSA opposes enactment of the proposed rule.
evaluation. For example, a state may discontinue Federal administrative Its opposition is based on the following
require all parties to call before they dig, enforcement in that state. regarding Section IV, Paragraph B—
but it may give certain exemptions The ANPRM asked for comments Administrative Process: The proposed
when the type of excavation involves regarding whether the described process rule: (a) Fails to use imperative language
the use of hand tools, noting that CGA’s would strike the right balance between and speaks in generalities, such as, what
2008 DIRT report indicates that 22 states the Congressional directive to PHMSA ‘‘the process would likely involve;’’ (b)
fall into this category. AGA wondered to undertake Federal administrative is devoid of elements mandating
how this type of scenario would affect enforcement, where necessary, while PHMSA provide those states deemed
a state’s evaluation. providing a state with a fair and ‘‘inadequate’’ or ‘‘nominally adequate’’
efficient means of showing that the with detailed evaluation results that
Response state’s enforcement program is adequate. support PHMSA’s determination; (c)
PHMSA does not propose to include Section IV.B suggested that PHMSA fails to provide adequate due process in
a criterion for a mandatory positive would likely evaluate state excavation the appeal of PHMSA’s determination;
response system that requires operator damage prevention enforcement in fact, there is no appeal process
and excavator participation. PHMSA programs on an annual basis, identified relative to PHMSA’s ‘‘final’’
believes this criterion is outside the considering factors such as those set determination, other than to try again
scope of this rulemaking. forth in Section IV.A. It noted that this next year; (d) offers the state no
Effective excavation damage annual review would likely include a opportunity whatsoever to undertake
prevention enforcement programs review of all of the enforcement actions corrective action or improvement prior
require adequate processes for taken by the state over the previous to PHMSA undertaking enforcement
identifying the at-fault party in damage year. actions; and (e) fails to ‘‘strike the right
incidents to enable action to be taken Section IV.B noted that if the state’s balance between the Congressional
against the at-fault party in any enforcement program is ultimately directive to PHMSA to undertake
enforcement case. PHMSA does not deemed inadequate in its most recent Federal administrative enforcement
consider this proposed rule to unfairly annual review, direct Federal where necessary while providing a state
target excavators for enforcement action, administrative enforcement against an with a fair and efficient means of
but instead to address an enforcement excavator who violated Federal showing that the state’s enforcement
gap in pipeline safety excavation requirements and damaged a pipeline in program is adequate.’’ The Council also
damage prevention. that state could proceed without further noted that the proposed rule fails to
PHMSA does not propose to make a process. meet ‘‘Element 7,’’ stipulated in the
distinction between ‘‘nominally The ANPRM also asked if the process Rule as mandatory for a
adequate’’ and ‘‘adequate’’ state should enable PHMSA to evaluate a ‘‘comprehensive damage prevention
enforcement programs. The proposed state enforcement decision concerning program.’’ The commenter noted that
criteria for evaluating state enforcement an individual incident during the course the proposed rule is limited to PHMSA
programs are designed to establish the of the year and potentially conduct regulated pipelines and excludes all
threshold for minimum adequacy of Federal administrative enforcement other underground facilities. It
state enforcement programs. PHMSA where a state deemed ‘‘nominally considers that by undertaking
intends to deem state enforcement adequate’’ in its most recent annual enforcement actions relating only to
programs either adequate or inadequate review decided not to undertake pipelines, PHMSA creates a de facto
through use of the review criteria and enforcement for an incident that dual enforcement system, which in
processes outlined in this NPRM. PHMSA believes may warrant itself is a key criterion in determining
PHMSA does not propose to use enforcement action. whether an enforcement program is
weighted criteria in the evaluation. adequate. Therefore, the proposed rule
Process for Determining the Adequacy
B. Administrative Process establishes an ‘‘inadequate enforcement
of State Enforcement
program’’ and should not be
Section IV.B of the ANPRM sought PUCO commented that the implemented.
comment on the administrative administrative due process for
procedures available to a state that determining whether a state program is Response
elects to contest a notice of inadequacy, ‘‘inadequate,’’ as stated in the ANPRM, This NPRM proposes a clearly-
should it receive one. It noted that the is very general and appears to be an defined process for determining the
procedures would likely involve a informal process. PUCO noted that it is adequacy of state enforcement
‘‘paper hearing’’ process where PHMSA unclear whether the determination that programs. PHMSA is authorized by
would notify a state that it considers its a state program is ‘‘inadequate’’ is to be Congress through the PIPES Act of 2006
excavation damage prevention law made by the head of PHMSA, PHMSA to pursue this rulemaking. The ANPRM
enforcement inadequate (i.e., following regional managers, a board or panel at was designed to solicit input from
its annual review), and the state would PHMSA, or some other entity altogether. interested stakeholders on how to
then have an opportunity to submit The WUCA commented that PHMSA construct the proposed rule. To the
written materials and explanations. should provide information and extent the ANPRM used the term
PHMSA would then make a final guidance that will clearly outline what ‘‘likely’’ in discussing a given approach,
written determination including the the state must do to create an acceptable it only means that PHMSA has not made
reasons for the decision. The damage enforcement program by any final decisions on anything at the
administrative procedures would also PHMSA’s standards. ANPRM or NPRM stage. Once the final
rule is published, the word likely will programs. These initiatives were enforcement responsibility should be
not appear in the text of any final described in more detail in the ANPRM. conducted elsewhere. Excavators should
requirement. not be exposed to multiple, divergent
PHMSA agrees that specific reasoning Federal Administrative Enforcement
and possibly conflicting enforcement
should be provided for any declaration Regarding the precept in the ANPRM, authorities and standards, and the
of state excavation damage law ‘‘If the state’s enforcement program is standards and procedures should clearly
enforcement program inadequacy. In ultimately deemed inadequate, direct define which agency will have
addition, PHMSA would evaluate states’ Federal administrative enforcement jurisdiction.
progress on a yearly basis to assess against an excavator who violated the
adequacy. PHMSA proposes to make state’s damage prevention law and NUCA commented to reemphasize the
public the results of the reviews of state damaged a pipeline in that state could importance of balanced enforcement in
excavation damage prevention law proceed,’’ AGA commented: that Federal administrative enforcement
enforcement programs. As noted above, • PHMSA should also consider what against an excavator who violated the
comparisons of states are not practical will trigger Federal administrative state’s excavation damage prevention
given the wide variety seen in state enforcement action. Is damage the only law should be coupled with Federal
enforcement programs. trigger or is there a potential for administrative enforcement against
enforcement action due to repeated pipeline operators who fail to locate and
Findings complaints from operators of reckless mark their pipelines accurately in
Missouri PSC commented that a excavation activities? (e.g., no accordance with the law.
state’s enforcement program should notification to 811; failure to hand- API and AOPL commented that they
either be deemed adequate or not expose pipeline; etc.) question the efficacy of direct Federal
adequate; a process that would set • The process should not allow
administrative enforcement against an
‘‘levels’’ of adequacy would simply be PHMSA to evaluate a state enforcement
excavator who violates a state’s
more subjective. Similarly, API and decision that has already been made.
• Only states determined to have an excavation damage prevention law and
AOPL noted that a state either has an damages a pipeline. They noted that
adequate program or it doesn’t, and that inadequate program should have the
possibility of PHMSA intervention. state one-call laws vary with respect to
the state should not be held in ‘‘limbo’’ elements such as notification time,
and should not constantly be second- Like AGA, APGA, AGC, others
commented that PHMSA should not ticket life, tolerance zone, and white
guessed. They agree that if a state
evaluate a state’s enforcement decision lining. Without a Federal minimum
program is deemed deficient then
concerning an individual damage standard to support Federal
PHMSA should work with the state to
incident in a state where PHMSA has administrative enforcement, they do not
make it better.
The WUCA commented that if a found the enforcement program to be believe it is appropriate or practical for
written statement is provided to the adequate or nominally adequate. PHMSA to enforce state laws evenly or
state notifying it of an inadequate Instead, APGA suggested PHMSA consistently.
excavation damage prevention law should consider whether certain high AGC noted that the goal of
enforcement program, specific reasoning profile events received adequate enforcement should be to fairly arrive at
must be provided for the ruling. enforcement action by the state in the rational outcomes, such as education
Additionally, rather than a ‘‘likely’’ course of its periodic review of the and penalties that correspond to the
opportunity to provide a showing at a state’s overall enforcement program. gravity of the violation, without
later time, if deemed inadequate, a clear NAPSR strongly suggested that only imposing unnecessarily high transaction
policy should be developed. the states with inadequate programs be costs on any participant, including the
AGC commented that the subject to PHMSA examination of enforcement authority.
administrative procedures should enforcement decisions made at the state
level, and only after PHMSA determines PST offered comments/questions
include public notice of PHMSA’s
the principal factor of the state’s regarding consequences to states that
determination of inadequacy in the
inadequacy has been repeated failure to choose to be inadequate. PST noted that
Federal Register with a detailed
enforce the law against clear cases of ‘‘PHMSA should clearly define in the
explanation of the circumstances
egregious violations. Similarly, Nicor NPRM what the consequences are for a
justifying PHMSA’s determination.
Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas stated that if a state is deemed state that is found to have an
Corporation commented that PHMSA nominally adequate, the state’s ‘‘inadequate’’ or ‘‘nominally adequate’’
should not pursue a comparison of one enforcement decision concerning an excavation damage prevention program.
state to another, but should only individual event should be upheld, but Will excavation damage prevention
evaluate individual states through PHMSA should provide guidance to that grants/monies be the only thing affected
review of their excavation damage state so that it improves its program for or will other state funding and authority
prevention programs, including state the next review. EPPG noted that if be penalized as well?’’ Additionally,
laws and enforcement authority. PHMSA took action in a state that had PST noted ‘‘While we agree with
passed the most recent assessment of its PHMSA and Congress that states have a
Response enforcement program, it would responsibility to ensure a system is in
PHMSA is proposing to have state undermine the purpose of the place to protect underground pipelines,
excavation damage prevention law assessment itself. what are the consequences if a state
enforcement programs be deemed either EPPG commented that PHMSA chooses to ignore that responsibility in
adequate or inadequate; PHMSA is not should define how enforcement hopes that PHMSA will take it on? Will
proposing to establish levels of responsibility between PHMSA and the the financial consequences or loss of
adequacy. PHMSA intends to continue state would be implemented. EPPG authority be greater than the possible
its SDP grant program, one-call grant noted that as important as it is to short-term financial benefits to a state
program, and various other initiatives identify and intercede in states found to faced with a budget crisis? Is PHMSA
designed to assist states with improving have inadequate one-call enforcement, it staffed and funded adequately to take on
their excavation damage prevention is also important to clarify how such a greater enforcement role?’’
Response reconsideration within a certain time does have discretion in weighting the
PHMSA intends to evaluate the frame. API, AOPL, Nicor, and evaluation criteria applicable to SDP
existence and adequacy of state Panhandle Energy support the grant applications. However, PHMSA
excavation damage prevention law development of administrative has not proposed any changes to the
enforcement programs. PHMSA is procedures that would be available for SDP grant criteria in this proposed rule.
proposing that this will be done, in part, states that elect to contest a notice of Process
by reviewing state enforcement records inadequacy. Nicor noted that this would
afford the state a fair and efficient AGC commented that subsequent to
to ascertain whether a state is effectively public hearings, a commission should
applying its enforcement authority, means of showing that the enforcement
program is adequate. be convened to establish a
assuming such authority is provided for predetermined timeline in which states
in state excavation damage prevention PUCO noted that a definition of
‘‘nominally adequate,’’ a description of must meet certain benchmarks
law. PHMSA proposes to evaluate demonstrating steps to address
states’ pipeline damage investigation how states may be qualified as
‘‘nominally adequate,’’ and a listing of inadequacies and that any penalties or
practices to ensure they are adequate to enforcement be coupled with direct
determine the at-fault party for the implications of this designation for
state programs should be provided. enforcement against pipeline operators
excavation damage incidents. As noted, who fail to accurately locate and mark
MidAmerican Energy noted that the
excavators will be subject to Federal facilities.
‘‘paper hearing’’ process described in
administrative enforcement only in The Texas pipeline associations
the ANPRM would be appropriate.
states determined to have inadequate commented that the first step in the
enforcement programs, and PHMSA is Response process used to determine the adequacy
proposing to make decisions regarding The criteria PHMSA will use to of a state’s program should be an
Federal administrative enforcement in determine the adequacy of state evaluation of each state’s program
those states on a case-by-case basis. enforcement programs and the against a common set of known factors.
Balanced enforcement of excavation administrative process for a state to They commented that once PHMSA
damage prevention laws is important. appeal a determination of inadequacy completes its evaluation, the state
As appropriate, PHMSA is proposing to are proposed in this NPRM. should be permitted to comment on the
enforce either this rule (once it is final) evaluation before it is finalized. They
against excavators or existing Civil Penalties also consider that excavation damage
regulations applicable to pipeline AGC commented that PHMSA must prevention stakeholders should be given
operators and their contractors against consider education as an alternative or an opportunity to comment on the
the at-fault party. PHMSA has enforced supplement to civil or other penalties, evaluation. When a final determination
existing excavation damage prevention and in cases where financial penalties has been made and a state’s program is
regulations applicable to pipeline are assessed revenues generated must be found inadequate in some respect, the
operators. PHMSA believes that reserved to finance excavation damage state should be provided an opportunity
enforcement of existing excavation prevention education and technologies to make improvements to its program.
damage prevention regulations used in support of excavation damage API and AOPL commented that
applicable to pipeline operators, at both prevention activities. PHMSA should use a multi-step process
state and Federal levels, is a deterrent to when determining whether a state’s
non-compliant behavior and reduces Response program is inadequate, perhaps
excavation damage to pipelines. Enforcement tools other than civil including preliminary determinations,
PHMSA does not have authority to penalties, such as compliance orders, interim determinations, and eventually
enforce state laws and has included the can be useful tools for enforcement of final determinations. They also noted
proposed Federal requirements for excavation damage prevention laws. that at each step of the process, PHMSA
excavators in this proposed rulemaking. However, PHMSA believes that civil should clearly describe, in functional
PHMSA proposes to consider state penalty authority and effective use of rather than prescriptive terms, changes
enforcement program adequacy to be a that authority are essential components required for a state’s program to be
factor in determining state pipeline of effective excavation damage deemed adequate. They commented that
safety grant funding levels (after a prevention law enforcement programs. the process for this provision should be
lengthy grace period). PHMSA believes PHMSA does not propose to require the the same as is currently used in the state
this approach will provide a financial use of sanctions other than those certification program and that
disincentive for states to disregard their provided in existing pipeline safety assessment of a state’s program should
enforcement responsibility. PHMSA is statutes or regulations. be at the program level, not at an
seeking comment on this conclusion. individual case level. API and AOPL
Costs also consider that enough time should
Appeals
API and AOPL noted that PHMSA be granted at each step of the process to
Several commenters, including API, may consider using its grant resources, allow states time to modify their
AOPL, PUCO, and Michigan such as the SDP grants, to encourage programs as needed at the legislative
Consolidated Gas, commented that state compliance with the elements of and/or regulatory level. This process
states should be provided opportunities this rulemaking. That may require should, however, be completed
to respond to and appeal PHMSA’s changes to the existing grant criteria that expeditiously to ensure that compliance
decisions on the adequacy of a state could be included in a proposed and is timely and the public interest is
enforcement program. PUCO noted that final rule. preserved.
procedures for determining the Similarly, PST commented that the
adequacy of a state’s program and the Response administrative process for states to
process for appeals for reconsideration PHMSA agrees that the SDP grant contest notices of inadequacy described
should be more fully described, and program can be targeted to improve state in the ANPRM seems fair to the states.
include a requirement for PHMSA to excavation damage prevention law Among the concerns PST expressed,
review and respond to any petition for enforcement programs, and PHMSA however, are the time periods that
would be established for: (1) PHMSA to prevention stakeholder comments on has the funding and resources to
issue a notice of inadequacy after its state enforcement program evaluations. administer its enforcement program, a
annual review; (2) a state to contest this PHMSA proposes to evaluate the periodic review is acceptable, but
notice; (3) PHMSA to make a final states’ enforcement programs whether suggested that yearly is not necessary.
written determination; (4) a state to they are administered by state pipeline MidAmerican Energy commented that
petition for reconsideration; and (5) agencies or other state authorities. an annual review of a state’s excavation
PHMSA to rule on the petition for PHMSA proposes to communicate the damage prevention law enforcement
reconsideration. PHMSA needs to strike implications of this proposed rule with program would be appropriate with the
the right balance between waiting too state enforcement authorities outside of provision that a state should be allowed
long to intervene and not waiting long state pipeline safety agencies, including to petition PHMSA to show that its
enough. attorneys general, state police agencies, previously inadequate enforcement
The Texas pipeline associations and other authorities, as required. program has been upgraded so that
echoed this comment in that the PHMSA would plan to make its Federal administrative enforcement is
opportunity for a state to make determination as to the adequacy of a no longer required.
improvements must take into account state program as soon as practicable
an appropriate time period for the state after completion of the state annual Response
agency to make the required review. A state would then have 30 days PHMSA agrees that annual reviews of
improvements in a manner complying from receipt of the notice of inadequacy state excavation damage prevention law
with state law. These time periods will to respond. enforcement programs should include
need to be tailored to each situation Review Cycle reviews of program effectiveness
because some may require legislative indicators and is proposing this in the
action while others may only require an API and AOPL noted that PHMSA NPRM. However, PHMSA believes it
internal agency policy change. They should require annual reviews of state appropriate to include program
noted that while Federal administrative excavation damage prevention adequacy as part of its annual review
enforcement may be necessary in some programs, but such reviews should be process, but does not propose to include
states, reasonable efforts should be initiated after initial adequacy additional evaluation of continuing
exerted and sufficient time provided to determinations have been completed. effectiveness indicators.
promote adequate state-based They noted that annual reviews should
enforcement of excavation damage focus on continuing effectiveness Standards
programs. They suggested that there indicators (i.e., whether or not API and AOPL commented that
may be situations where PHMSA could excavation damage incidents are PHMSA should consider the
facilitate discussions between state declining) and not simply on whether establishment of minimum standards for
stakeholders to establish a plan to every incident has merely been critical elements of state one-call laws,
address certain deficiencies. documented and investigated. such as, but not limited to, notification
Missouri PSC commented that the NAPSR commented that the time, tolerance zones and white-lining
process outlined in the ANPRM appears frequency of review of a state excavation (or otherwise denoting the area of
to strike an appropriate balance between damage prevention program should be intended proposed excavation).
the Congressional directive to PHMSA tailored to the level of adequacy initially EPPG and Panhandle Energy also
to undertake Federal administrative determined for the program, using noted that prior to an audit by Federal
enforcement while providing a state criteria included in the final rule authorities of any state program, a clear
with a fair and efficient means of resulting from this ANPRM. Thus, states and understood ‘‘standard’’ should be
showing that its enforcement program is with the lowest level of initial adequacy prepared that a state can be audited
adequate. However, Missouri PSC noted could be reviewed annually, while against and met. EPPG supports the
further comments may well be states with higher levels could be ANPRM’s annual audit proposal of state
necessary depending on the provisions reviewed less often. NAPSR also noted programs but is concerned that this
of the actual proposed rule. that the ANPRM speaks about an annual effort could draw unnecessary resources
NAPSR questioned how PHMSA review that will likely include a review away from PHMSA’s other safety
would anticipate seeking information of all of the enforcement actions taken programs. Therefore, EPPG advocated a
from other agencies in those states by the state over the previous year, and ‘‘standard,’’ which is understood by all
where the enforcement agency is not the questioned whether this would be the parties that could be more quickly used
state pipeline safety agency? state liaison asking a few additional as an audit tool during the annual audit.
questions during the annual evaluation
Response or something more substantial with Response
PHMSA does not propose to convene extensive documentation. The criteria for review of state
a commission to establish a Similarly, Paiute Pipeline and enforcement programs are proposed in
predetermined timeline in which states Southwest Gas Corporation suggested this NPRM and PHMSA welcomes
must meet benchmarks demonstrating that if a state is found nominally comment on these criteria. However,
steps to address inadequacies in their adequate in its most recent annual PHMSA is not proposing a model state
damage prevention enforcement review, PHMSA should recommend one-call law or other audit standard in
programs. PHMSA believes the state placing the state on a staggered review this rulemaking.
enforcement program evaluation criteria period, such as two or more years. They
State Resources
proposed in this NPRM, in effect, commented, however, that if a state is

establish benchmarks. found to be inadequate, PHMSA should APGA expressed concern that the
PHMSA has proposed the process for recommend continuing with an annual review process may become very time
evaluation of state enforcement review to assist the state in enhancing consuming for both PHMSA and the
programs and the process by which its excavation damage prevention states, which would have the
states may contest notices of program. unintended effect of diverting limited
inadequacy. PHMSA does not propose Michigan Consolidated Gas resources away from the excavation
to consider excavation damage commented that considering the state damage prevention effort. APGA
considers that there should be further inform the development of such The APGA opposes establishment of
discussion about exactly what this standards. Federal requirements for excavators and
review would entail before a rule is considers that PHMSA should defer to
Federal Requirements
proposed. existing state laws where they prescribe
Michigan Consolidated Gas Several commenters, including AGA, excavation damage prevention
commented that PHMSA should API, AOPL, Michigan Consolidated Gas, requirements. APGA considers that
consider when evaluating a state’s and others, support establishing a creating a Federal requirement that
enforcement program that this proposed Federal requirement for excavators. would overrule state requirements only
process can be influenced by the ability They noted that the minimum if the state is found not to be enforcing
of the state to carry out enforcement requirements in the PIPES Act and the its excavation damage prevention law
(i.e., state resources, funding, volume of U.S. Code are sufficient for establishing would create confusion in both the
complaints, etc.). Similarly, the Federal requirements, and that keeping excavation and utility communities as
Michigan PSC commented that PHMSA it simple is the most effective approach. to which requirements apply. APGA
must be flexible depending upon the API and AOPL commented that the noted that only where a state has no
resources given to the state to provide proposed requirements should lead to standards for such activities should
for an adequate program. greater pipeline safety by making PHMSA apply Federal requirements. On
excavators more aware of their one-call the other hand, API and AOPL consider
Response responsibilities and the consequences of that while conditions vary from state-to-
The state enforcement program review failing to comply with state laws and state and that ‘‘one size does not fit all,’’
process should not be too time regulations. AGA commented, however, PHMSA should establish minimum
consuming or divert resources away that the ANPRM was unclear whether requirements through a notice and
from excavation damage prevention PHMSA intends to try and impose these comment rulemaking process.
responsibilities. The review criteria and standards on excavators that might MidAmerican Energy Company
process in this proposed rule have been include homeowners, land owners, commented that the minimum
written to be as simple as possible to private contractors, and other utilities. requirements presented in the ANPRM
address this concern. However, PHMSA AGC commented that if PHMSA are an appropriate starting point, and
is seeking comment on this conclusion. deems a state’s excavation damage that if experience reveals that additional
Resources can affect the ability of a prevention law enforcement program or revised requirements are necessary,
state to meet its excavation damage inadequate, the basic premises in the then revisions can be made based on the
prevention law enforcement ANPRM are reasonable. AGC suggested documented record. However, they
responsibilities. However, PHMSA does that PHMSA should refer to the CGA noted that any additional or revised
not propose to assess state enforcement Best Practices as a template for guidance standards should consider that state
resources, but instead to assess state excavation damage prevention laws
standards in the absence of appropriate
pertain to more than just pipelines—
enforcement records. If state resources state standards until a determination of
they pertain to all types of underground
are insufficient to enforce the state the adequacy of the state excavation
facilities. It does not appear to be
excavation damage prevention law damage prevention program is made.
practical or prudent to approach this set
adequately, state enforcement records Similarly, EPPG fully supports the of issues soley from a pipeline-only
are likely to reflect the insufficiency. development of a Federal requirement perspective, or to promote a ‘‘one size
C. Federal Requirements for Excavators that PHMSA could use to determine if fits all’’ approach to underground
a state’s excavation safety program is facilities excavation damage prevention.
Section IV.C of the ANPRM sought adequate but that PHMSA should not be Missouri PSC, Paiute Pipeline, and
comment on the establishment of the the sole, or even primary, developer of Southwest Gas Corporation commented
Federal requirements for excavators that this standard. A national consensus that Federal requirements limited to the
PHMSA would be enforcing in a state standard should be developed by all the minimum requirements reflected in the
that PHMSA has found to have an various stakeholders, including Federal referenced Federal statute should be
inadequate enforcement program. It and state agency regulators, industry, sufficient. However, Missouri PSC noted
noted that at a minimum the standards the excavation community, members of that Federal requirements should also
will reflect the words cited in the PIPES the public, one-call organizations, and refer to any state statutory provisions
Act regarding requirements for other excavation-affected parties. that are either more stringent or
excavators. GulfSafe commented that setting different in practice (such as damages
Section IV.C gave examples to which standards for excavators would bring being reported to the one-call center
some commenters addressed some consistency to the excavation rather than the pipeline operator
specifically, including: community, especially for those directly). EPPG and Panhandle Energy
• Should the Federal requirements for excavators who consistently work in support the development of a template
excavators be limited to the minimum multiple states. GulfSafe also considers that PHMSA could use to determine if
requirements reflected in the PIPES Act it important that any prescriptive rule a state’s excavation safety program is
or should they be more detailed and use the CGA Best Practices as a adequate. Panhandle considers that a
extensive? foundation for the rule to gain national consensus standard or
• Will implementing the 911 acceptance in the excavation recommended practice should be
requirement cause any unintended community. The organization noted that developed by all the involved
consequences in practice? the CGA Best Practices have long been stakeholders, including Federal and
• Are there suggested alternatives to a consensus based approach that has state agency regulators, industry, the
these standards? understood that one size doesn’t fit all excavation community, members of the
The ANPRM also suggested that the and has made allowances for geography public, one-call organizations, and other
CGA Best Practices and API and soil types as well as local practices. excavation-affected parties. EPPG and
Recommended Practice 1166, Best Practices are intended to be Panhandle consider that a national
Excavation Monitoring and Observation voluntary, not prescriptive, and there is consensus standard should address the
(November 2005), could be used to evidence that they are working. issues mentioned in the ANPRM in
Section IV.C, at a minimum, but should sets of standards, state and Federal, adequate, it is conceivable that
also address many other issues which excavators must follow. Due to excavators would only be required to
including, among others: the diversity of state requirements, the meet the Federal requirements for a
• Expectations of individual state’s Federal requirements would short period of time (from one annual
programs; expectations of excavators, undoubtedly contain inconsistencies review to another). Should this happen,
regardless of legal or contractual and conflicts with the standards of at excavators are likely to become
affiliation. least some states. confused about their compliance
• Types of excavators covered by the Nicor commented that one aspect of responsibilities.
standard (all excavators regardless of the minimum standards that is Southern California Gas and
affiliation). inadequate involves the locating and California Gas and Electric prefer that
• Individual state’s abilities to contest marking of facilities for which the standards for excavators for
an annual Federal audit’s findings. ownership is unclear. During this period reporting damage should define
• Physical excavation guidelines prior to completion, such facilities may ‘‘damage’’ in more detail, similarly to
(locating, marking, communications, be left unmarked after a call to the one- California Government Code 4216.4.(c).
etc.). call system. As an example, Nicor noted They noted that all damage, even
• The role of one-call programs. that in a new subdivision, it is often coating or cathodic protection wire
• Excavation damage reporting unclear who has ownership of and damage, can affect the integrity of the
requirements. responsibility for locating and marking pipeline over time.
• Description of excavator’s sewer and water lines prior to The three Texas pipeline associations
responsibilities prior to and following completion, at which point the property commented that it is probably best if
any excavation, including any spill or owner or municipality takes ownership. PHMSA adopts some set of Federal
damaging incident to the pipeline NUCA commented that the proposed requirements for excavation damage
operator. Federal requirements effectively cover
prevention to be enforced in situations
• Requirements to contact 911 if any the primary responsibilities of the
where a state program is determined to
release of product or natural gas occurs. excavator, and are consistent with past
be inadequate. They noted that if the
• Establishment of a mechanism to DOT excavation damage prevention
scope of a state agency’s excavation
ensure the state receives reports of messages, such as the ‘‘Dig Safely’’
damage prevention standards was not
pipeline damage incidents in a timely initiative of the 1990s. However, NUCA
the source of the finding of inadequacy,
manner. noted that utilization of ‘‘location
• Use of ‘‘emergency’’ excavation it would be least disruptive to all
information’’ is too vague for inclusion
processes. aspects of industry for PHMSA to
in a new Federal requirement. General
• Excavation investigation simply enforce the existing state
information of underground pipeline
requirements if pipeline damage occurs. facilities should never substitute for standards. They further noted that this
• Explicit state authority. meeting all of the operator’s locating approach may cause some legal and
• Enforcement documentation and marking responsibilities. practical issues for PHMSA to provide
requirements. Ohio PUC commented that consistent enforcement. It could
• Reference to other useful guidance requirements for pipeline operators and represent a significant challenge for
documents, such as the Common excavators should parallel, and PHMSA PHMSA to educate its staff on the large
Ground Alliance’s work. should consider providing guidance on variety of state standards that they
• Due process criteria for excavators how it intends to evaluate liability and would need to enforce.
if liability is found. enforcement if an excavator damages a USIC Locating Services’ comments
EPPG noted that some of these issues pipeline system due to a pipeline indicate that it is in favor of establishing
may not be suitable for a national owner/operator failing to mark standards for excavators with regard to:
consensus standard, and enforcement underground lines or marking them the use of a mandatory 72-hour notice
provisions are left out altogether since incorrectly or inaccurately. Ohio PUC requirement; limiting the scope of a
they are not suitable for a national also commented that any Federal ticket to 1,320 feet; use of a 24″
consensus standard, but those not requirements should avoid specific tolerance zone on either side of the
included in a standard could be requirements for marking standards that buried facility; requiring white-marking
incorporated within a future PHMSA may conflict with reasonable and (as opposed to just suggesting white-
‘‘state guide’’ for excavation safety. appropriate marking standards marking); emergency locate requests
Michigan PSC commented that more developed by individual states. made by excavators; and strict penalties
detailed and extensive requirements are The PST commented that there are a levied against excavators abusing
not necessary and may be in direct number of issues that need to be emergency locate provisions.
conflict with various states’ laws. It also addressed if PHMSA imposes Federal The Wisconsin Transportation
asked that ‘‘excavator’’ be defined. For requirements on excavators when Builders Association (WTBA)
example, will homeowners be subject to PHMSA deems a state to have an commented that industry is concerned
the Federal requirements? inadequate enforcement program. For about the emphasis being placed solely
NAPSR commented that PHMSA example: (1) Will these standards be on the excavator. They noted that while
should not undermine state permanent or will excavators again be some requirements may be appropriate
requirements with a second layer of held to state standards once the state and helpful, they will nearly always
excavator standards, but should defer to program is deemed adequate? (2) What create unintended consequences such as
the individual states in such matters. happens if the state enforcement unnecessary cost and uncontrollable
They noted that the Federal law appears program is deemed inadequate but some risk. According to the WTBA, there is
to define the expectations for excavators of the state’s standards or requirements rarely discussion regarding who is
reasonably and provides a basis for are more stringent than the Federal responsible for costs associated with
enforcement. If PHMSA adopts government’s? Will PHMSA impose its unexpected delays to contractors. These
regulations further defining what lesser standards? (3) If the standards costs are substantial and continue to
standards it believes an excavator revert to those of the state once the affect the cost of public projects
should be held to, it risks creating two enforcement program is deemed adversely.
Response does not address those operators’ AGA, Missouri PSC, NUCA, Southern
PHMSA proposes to apply Federal responsibilities. California Gas, California Gas and
requirements to all excavators, with the Requirements for pipeline operators Electric, and others expressed concern
regarding locating and marking their that the volume of calls resulting from
exception of homeowners excavating
facilities are clearly defined in existing this requirement may be unmanageable
with hand tools on their own property,
pipeline safety regulations (49 CFR Parts and could result in limited emergency
in states PHMSA deems to have
190–199). PHMSA will continue to response resources being used in
inadequate excavation damage
enforce existing Federal excavation situations that really do not necessitate
prevention law enforcement programs.
damage prevention regulations an emergency response. AGA, Southern
The term ‘‘excavator’’ is defined in this
applicable to pipeline operators if California Gas, and California Gas and
proposed rule. PHMSA cannot enforce
investigations reveal that pipeline Electric noted, for example, that as a
state laws in the absence of Federal
operators fail to comply with those result fire departments could have to
requirements because, to the extent state
regulations. PHMSA does not propose to respond to every excavation damage
requirements go above and beyond the amend the standards currently incident reported via 911, including
minimum Federal laws, PHMSA has no applicable to pipeline operators in this breaks on small diameter service lines
authority to enforce such requirements. rulemaking proceeding. where the gas may be safely venting to
Development of Federal requirements is, PHMSA considered the comments the atmosphere and public safety is
therefore, a prerequisite to Federal regarding one-call standards, but generally not threatened. The response
administrative enforcement. The believes those types of standards would of fire departments to potentially
standards proposed in this NPRM are be overly-prescriptive and confusing for thousands of inconsequential
designed to establish minimum the purposes of this proposed rule. This excavation damages could compromise
requirements for excavators to avoid proposed rulemaking does not impede their ability to respond to other events
excavation damage to pipelines. any party’s legal rights to pursue that are actually life-threatening
PHMSA does not propose to develop restitution of damages from any other emergencies. Missouri PSC was aware of
the Federal requirements through a party involved in a damage incident. one major gas distribution operator that
consensus process, but rather through is having its practice of advising
this rulemaking process. PHMSA used Implementing 911 Requirement
excavators to call 911 questioned by
the PIPES Act to inform the AGA commented that implementation local emergency officials.
development of the proposed Federal of the 911 requirement can result in MidAmerican Energy Company,
requirements. some unintended consequences that Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas
This proposed rule does not refer to may actually cause behaviors and Corporation commented that the 911
any state standards; PHMSA believes to actions that are detrimental to pipeline requirement should not be mandated for
do so could create an overly- safety. It noted that as a practice in all releases of hazardous materials. If a
prescriptive set of standards. Different responding to 911 calls being made, fire violation of the excavation damage
states have different geographic and departments often bill their costs to the prevention laws results in a public
demographic conditions and an excavator and in some circumstances safety emergency that may endanger life
effective damage prevention program for the natural gas utility. Very often, the or cause serious bodily harm or damage
one state may not necessarily work for excavator is a professional contractor. to property, then, as for any public
another. However, PHMSA considers As a result, excavators are having safety emergency, the use of the 911
the proposed Federal regulations to be second thoughts about dialing 911 when telephone notification system would be
the minimal standard that is basic to damage results in a leak, particularly on appropriate. Otherwise, calling 911
any effective excavation damage smaller diameter plastic pipe that is should not be necessary.
prevention law enforcement program. viewed as an ‘‘easy’’ repair for Regarding emergency responders,
Because state and Federal requirements professional contractors who think they NUCA commented that the proposed
will never be enforced simultaneously, have the ability and the means to make rule should address the role of first
the existence of a Federal requirement an acceptable repair. Having unqualified responders in situations where the
should not present any conflicts with personnel making repairs on natural gas escape of flammable, toxic, or corrosive
existing state requirements for lines can lead to catastrophic product is released as a result of damage
excavators. However, PHMSA is seeking consequences. to an underground pipeline. NUCA
comment on this issue. PHMSA does AGA also noted that natural gas noted that if a 911 call is made, the
recognize that excavators should be utilities try to foster a culture that responders must be trained in how to
informed of the Federal requirements in encourages a contractor to notify the gas respond to the situation effectively.
states where those standards will apply. utility promptly when a pipe is dented NUCA noted that traditionally,
To that end, PHMSA intends to or nicked, its coating scratched, or even representatives from the company that
continue to work with excavator trade when a tracer wire is cut or anode wire owns the gas or hazardous liquid
associations, state agencies and one-call broken. The motivation for the utility is pipeline are best educated and equipped
centers, the Common Ground Alliance, that it can respond and determine what to handle these situations.
and other key excavation damage repair actions are needed, to ensure the Nicor commented that the 911
prevention stakeholders to pipe will not fail or leak at some point requirement is most appropriate when
communicate the requirements of the in the future, and that the pipe can be someone other than the pipeline owner
final rule and the adequacy status of located in response to future excavation or operator damages the pipeline.
each state as broadly as possible. activity. The utilities have developed Operators who accidentally damage
As we have stated previously, relationships with contractors so that their own facilities should have the
PHMSA’s statutory enforcement they trust they will not be billed in flexibility of calling 911 if they need
authority pertains only to excavation circumstances where the contractors are further assistance in making an area
damage prevention as it relates to forthcoming and can demonstrate they safe. As a basis, Nicor cited that
pipelines. Because PHMSA has no have made a reasonable attempt to dig pipeline operators are also sometimes
jurisdiction over sewer and water responsibly and follow one-call and excavators and that provisions should
facility operators, this proposed rule state statutes. be developed for instances where an
operator’s excavation crew accidentally in these instances, but may exercise available to the same extent it is
damages its own facility and that results discretion as to whether to request that available to a pipeline operator.
in a release of natural gas. The crews are the 911 operator dispatch emergency Commenters were invited to submit
trained and qualified to handle response personnel to the damage site. their views on this process or suggest
emergency response and to make PHMSA welcomes additional comments alternatives. For example:
repairs. Often times, the release of gas on the 911 issue. • Is the process too formal in the
is secured very quickly and should not sense that excavators contesting a
Reference to API RP 1166 citation would have to prepare a written
warrant calling 911. Additionally, after
responding to a 911 call involving AGA commented that API RP 1166 response for the record and potentially
excavator damage and a release of does not apply in developing standards appear before a hearing officer?
natural gas from a pipeline, some fire for excavators in that it does not apply • Is the process not formal enough in
departments have sent invoices to to natural gas distribution operators. the sense that it does not provide for
natural gas operators for costs incurred AGA noted that this standard is a useful formal rules of evidence, transcriptions,
for hazmat response. Nicor noted that resource for gas transmission pipeline or discovery? Or does this process strike
the inability of an operator to exercise operators, but that the decision to the right balance by being efficient and
discretion in calling 911 may lead to monitor and possibly observe any at the same time providing enough
strained relationships between natural excavation activity is at the discretion of formality that excavators feel the
gas pipeline operators and fire the pipeline operator. process is fair and their due process
departments. Several commenters noted that the rights are maintained?
NUCA, Paiute Pipeline and Southwest CGA Best Practices and API • How should the civil penalty
Gas Corporation commented that Recommended Practice 1166 could be criteria found in 49 U.S.C. 60122(b)
PHMSA should specify that excavators used to inform the development of such apply to excavators?
must call 911 if the ‘‘damage results in standards, but that the minimum All Parties
the escape of any flammable, toxic, or requirements stated in 49 U.S.C. 60114
corrosive gas or liquid,’’ as specified in are appropriate. Paiute Pipeline and AGC and NUCA commented that the
the PIPES Act, instead of trying to Southwest Gas Corporation commented adjudication process outlined by
include all of these under the umbrella that PHMSA should refrain from citing PHMSA seems fair; however, PHMSA
of ‘‘hazardous products.’’ They noted best practices from any organization, must carefully consider that if an
that excavators are not emergency publication or individual entity as excavator is not found to be at fault,
responders, and the regulation should regulation. excavators must maintain the right to
be as specific as possible to distinguish pursue damages for downtime and the
Response ability to recover legal expenses.
between natural gas and other gases or
liquids to identify what products are PHMSA is not proposing to use API Allowing excavators all rights to due
considered ‘‘hazardous’’ by PHMSA. RP 1166 to inform the development of process should be recognized, and the
Michigan PSC noted that the Federal requirement for enforcement same privileges afforded to others
implementing the 911 requirement will and believes the requirements stated in subject to Federal administrative
not cause any unintended consequences the PIPES Act are appropriate. enforcement (i.e., pipeline operators)
in practice. Paiute and Southwest Gas should be afforded to excavators. NUCA
D. Adjudication Process
Corporation also commented that all noted that ensuring excavators the right
API RP 1162 related communications Section IV.D of the ANPRM sought to pursue damages (i.e., downtime
and activities should promote the comment on the adjudication process expenses), must be considered when
requirement of calling 911 if a pipeline that PHMSA would use if it cited an establishing a new Federal adjudication
damage incident causes a release of excavator for failure to comply with process. NUCA also noted that
product. They also noted that although Federal requirements established by this excavators regularly lose significant
they cannot reference any empirical rulemaking process in a state where revenue in downtime expenses after
evidence that identifies any unintended PHMSA has deemed the enforcement having to shut down projects because of
consequences of implementing the 911 program inadequate. It noted that at a underground facilities that were either
requirement, as excavators become minimum, an excavator that allegedly not marked or marked inaccurately.
better educated on this requirement, violated the applicable requirement According to NUCA, this is an
calls to emergency response agencies would have the right to: receive written enormous financial problem facing
will likely increase. notice of the allegations, including a professional excavators, and one that
description of the factual evidence must be addressed in the PHMSA
Response supporting the allegations; file a written regulation. AGC agreed that hearings
PHMSA considered all of the response to the allegations; request a should be open to the public and
comments pertaining to implementing hearing; be represented by counsel if the conducted at one of PHMSA’s five
the 911 requirement. The PIPES Act excavator chooses; examine the regional offices or an alternative
requires excavators to promptly call the evidence; submit relevant information location accessible to all parties.
911 emergency telephone number if a and call witnesses on his or her behalf; MidAmerican Energy Company also
damage results in the escape of any and otherwise contest the allegations of noted that participation in any process
flammable, toxic, or corrosive gas or violation. Hearings would likely be held should not preclude the ability to
liquid that may endanger life or cause at one of PHMSA’s five regional offices pursue further legal remedies a
serious bodily harm or damage to or via teleconference. The hearing participant may determine to be
property. PHMSA understands that officer would be an attorney from appropriate.
excavators and utility operators are PHMSA’s Office of Chief Counsel. The USIC Locating Services commented
sometimes required to reimburse 911 excavator would also likely have the that whatever process is established
centers for the cost of dispatching opportunity to petition for should provide interested parties a right
emergency response personnel to a reconsideration of the agency’s of intervention so that the resulting
damage site. Therefore, PHMSA is administrative decision and judicial record accurately reflects the positions
proposing that excavators must call 911 review of final agency action would be of all affected parties.
Nicor noted that excavators who are stakeholders to advise enforcement penalty to the specific circumstances of
also operators of pipelines regulated agencies are a proven method of a particular violation. It considers that
under 49 CFR Part 192 already fall ensuring fair and balanced excavation ‘‘an egregious violation or a pattern of
under the enforcement requirements of damage prevention law enforcement. violations evidencing an intentional or
Subpart B in 49 CFR Part 190. If PHMSA Such may be the case with arbitration negligent disregard of the one-call
determines that it must take committees. While PHMSA does not provisions could present a serious threat
enforcement action against other propose to use an advisory committee to the public safety. In those, hopefully
excavators the same process could be for Federal administrative enforcement unusual, cases, the dangers presented by
followed. proceedings, PHMSA does not object to an excavator continuing to exhibit such
a state’s use of an advisory committee in a callous disregard for the public safety
Response the state enforcement process. should take precedence over the effect
PHMSA agrees that an excavator must that the assessment of a civil penalty
Civil Penalties
maintain the right to pursue damages for might have on the violator’s ability to
downtime and the ability to recover AGA noted that PHMSA must pay or to continue doing business. The
legal expenses if the excavator is not distinguish between levying any fines Illinois administrative regulations also
found to be at fault in an excavation on entities or persons engaged in contain these two penalty criteria.’’
damage incident investigation; this excavation damage prevention The three Texas pipeline associations
proposed rule does not infringe upon activities, as opposed to the fines and commented that regardless of process,
those rights. In addition, this proposed enforcement actions PHMSA any person or entity found guilty of
rule is intended to establish traditionally takes against pipeline violating the Federal requirements
adjudication procedures that protect the operators under 49 U.S.C. 60122(a). should face financial penalties that
rights of excavators to due process. Similarly, Paiute Pipeline and provide incentives for future
PHMSA also believes that interested Southwest Gas Corporation commented compliance and reflect the seriousness
parties should have the opportunity to that the penalty criteria found in 49 of the violation.
attend and observe hearings and the U.S.C. 60122(b) are excessive to the
average excavator and to the average Response
opportunity to request intervention
status within the PHMSA adjudication excavation damage. PHMSA proposes to use the civil
process so that the resulting record Paiute Pipeline, Southwest Gas penalty provisions described in 49
accurately reflects the position of all Corporation, and Missouri PSC U.S.C. 60101 et seq. as a basis for civil
affected parties. commented that PHMSA should work penalties levied against excavators
with the individual states on invoking subject to this proposed rule. PHMSA
Appeals civil penalties in their individual laws. believes this approach is preferable to
AGC commented that the excavator Missouri PSC agreed, commenting that establishing alternate civil penalty
should have the opportunity to petition unless the civil penalty provisions provisions specific to this proposed
for reconsideration of PHMSA’s existing in a state’s law are the reason rule. PHMSA proposes to take into
administrative decision, and judicial a state’s enforcement program is deemed account a violator’s ability to pay,
review of final agency action should be inadequate, the state’s penalties should ability to continue to do business, and
available to the same extent it is be applied rather than the Federal the seriousness of the violation when
available to a pipeline operator. penalties. determining appropriate civil penalties.
Similarly, the three Texas pipeline Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas PHMSA seeks comment on the
associations commented that there Corporation commented that the proposed use of civil penalties.
should be an appeals process for a party adjudication process outlined is
generally adequate, but to make the Formality
to challenge the outcome of the hearing.
process fair and efficient a step should AGA, AGC, MidAmerican Energy, and
Response be added allowing an alleged violator to Missouri PSC agree that the
The process for an excavator to accept PHMSA’s recommendation for a adjudication process noted in the
request reconsideration or appeal a reduced penalty and agreement to take ANPRM is not too formal. API, AOPL,
finding of violation by PHMSA is some remedial action such as attending and NUCA all support the process as
provided in this proposed rule. an educational seminar on underground described. API and AOPL commented
excavation damage prevention and that the adjudication should allow the
Arbitration and Advisory Committees pipeline safety. hearing officer sufficient flexibility to
Spectra Energy commented that each WTBA commented that civil penalties conduct the proceeding promptly and
state should have a clearly defined should not apply to excavators unless efficiently, such that decisions may be
process for arbitration or review of there was a truly unlawful act of rendered without undue delay.
enforcement actions for violations of negligence. Panhandle Energy and EPPG both
excavation damage prevention MidAmerican Energy Company suggested that the processes defined in
regulations. Spectra suggested that one agreed that the penalty criteria found in 49 CFR Part 190 be followed. Spectra
possible method is to have an 49 U.S.C. 60122(b) are reasonable to Energy Transmission noted that when
independent panel that would review consider in evaluating the amount of a an enforcement action relating to
and recommend final enforcement civil penalty to assess for a violation of violation of excavation damage
action. The panel should include the one-call provisions. MidAmerican prevention regulations is initiated, the
members that represent the one-call also questions whether the violator’s (1) excavator and pipeline operator should
center, pipeline operators and the ability to pay and (2) any effect on the have the opportunity for a hearing.
excavator community. ability of the violator to continue doing AGA commented that the
business are necessarily relevant criteria adjudication process must be a formal
Response in all cases. MidAmerican noted that the one, where the excavator is able to
As noted above, committees remainders of the penalty criteria defend his or her actions, explaining
composed of representatives of all appear to provide the flexibility for the how and why the damage occurred, and
excavation damage prevention agency to tailor the assessment of a civil to contest an alleged violation. AGA and
AGC both noted that the adjudication commented that an informal hearing Federal One-Call
process must provide for formal rules of must involve individuals that are No commenters that addressed the
evidence, transcriptions, and discovery, knowledgeable of construction and existing pipeline safety damage
to conduct fair proceedings that ensure design that are capable of determining prevention regulations, 49 CFR 192.614
all parties’ rights to due process are whether reasonable efforts were made and 195.442, considered these
maintained. AGC commented that a by all parties involved. requirements to be inadequate, nor did
formal adjudication process should be APGA agrees that enforcement they believe that PHMSA needed to
adopted to preserve the rights of an proceedings should be conducted at the make these requirements more detailed
excavator charged with a violation. The PHMSA regional office level rather than or specific. Several commented that to
process should include the right(s) to: headquarters. APGA also noted that do otherwise would lead to confusion
receive written notice of the allegations, Virginia has an excavation damage where the Federal requirements were
including a description of the evidence prevention law enforcement program different from state standards.
the allegations are based on; allow for a that involves a panel comprised of Commenters suggested that PHMSA
submission in response to the excavators, facility owners and others to should enforce states’ laws and that
allegations; and, allow for an informal advise on the appropriate level of states already have the ability to
hearing with counsel if necessary. AGC penalties, if any. APGA suggests that establish more detailed regulations on
also noted that the adjudication PHMSA consider whether a similar pipeline operators for facility locating
procedure should thoroughly examine system could work for any Federal and marking. AGA considers that it is
the evidence and allow for submission administrative enforcement actions. not logical for PHMSA to suggest that
of relevant information and testimony
Response Federal requirements addressing one-
from witnesses to adjudicate the
call types of issues can be imposed at
allegation of violation thoroughly. The majority of commenters support
MidAmerican Energy commented that the national level. They consider that
PHMSA’s approach for the adjudication adding more details at the Federal level
while the proposed process strikes the process proposed in this NPRM and that
appropriate balance, strict adherence to will be problematic since it may conflict
the process is sufficiently formal to with existing state regulations and
the formal rules of evidence or extensive protect the rights of excavators to due
discovery is not necessary or cannot take unique state laws into
process, but not so formal as to be consideration. AGA also commented
appropriate. MidAmerican also overly burdensome for alleged violators.
suggested that transcripts could be that no language in the Federal
PHMSA is not proposing to use an regulations is necessary regarding the
optional at the expense of the state or advisory panel modeled after Virginia’s
requesting party. ability of excavators to request a
excavation damage prevention program, consultation or job-site meeting with
Paiute Pipeline and Southwest Gas
but instead to follow the process underground facility operators, since
Corporation commented that the
described in this proposed rule. most one-call centers already have a
adjudication process should remain at
the state level, and not a formal Federal E. Existing Requirements Applicable to procedure for this.
process. They noted that excavators Owners and Operators of Pipeline AGC suggested that PHMSA
would appreciate the efficiency of Facilities encourage state regulatory authorities to
maintaining the adjudication process at equally enforce state laws applicable to
Section IV.E of the ANPRM invited underground facility owners and
the state level, and that if damages are
commenters to submit their feedback operators who fail to respond to a
involved, there is always the claim/
and comments on the adequacy of location request or fail to take
court system for excavators, operators
PHMSA’s existing requirements for reasonable steps, in response to such a
and states with enforcement authority
for billable and damage awards. They pipeline operators to participate in one- request. AGC also noted that state
consider that PHMSA should only step call organizations, respond to dig enforcement programs should consider
in when the entire program is deemed tickets, and perform their locating and the costs involved for excavators when
inadequate, and should not mandate marking responsibilities. Under existing they incur downtime due to a violation
enforcement at the Federal level but pipeline safety regulations 49 CFR by an operator or a locator.
rather partner with the states to enhance 192.614 for gas pipelines and 49 CFR Nicor commented that state
the enforcement at the state or local 195.442 for hazardous liquid pipelines, authorities must make enforcement of
level. They consider that PHMSA’s operators are required to have written owner/operator requirements a higher
support of states and their excavation excavation damage prevention programs priority and should consider the CGA
damage prevention programs will that require, in part, that the operator Best Practices.
ultimately provide the excavation provide for marking its pipelines in the API and AOPL commented that
damage prevention authority and area of an excavation for which the pipeline operators should be held to the
enforcement PHMSA is seeking with the excavator has submitted a locate same standards as other facility owners
proposed rulemaking procedures. They request. and excavators, and should be held
commented that PHMSA may want to Comments could address, for accountable to respond to locate
include a provision for the excavating example, whether PHMSA should requests in a timely and accurate
community to submit a request for consider making the existing regulatory manner. They noted, however, that they
Federal involvement if they feel the requirements more detailed and explicit do support regulations, such as those in
process is unfair and their rights are not in terms of: California (CA Govt. Code Section
• The amount of time for responding
being maintained at the state level. 4216–4216.9), that impose more explicit
WTBA commented that the proposed to locate requests; and additional requirements for both the
process appears to be too formal and • The accuracy of facility locating owner and the excavator when
does not sound like an ‘‘informal and marking; or excavating in close proximity to high
hearing.’’ It noted that there must be an • Making operator personnel priority, subsurface installations.
opportunity for a true informal hearing, available to consult with excavators GulfSafe commented that offshore
at a location near the project, to discuss following receipt of an excavation operators are exempt from being
actual facts of the incident. It also notification. members of a one-call system. It noted
that this was an appropriate exemption Executive Order 12866, Executive Order Since the Regulatory Flexibility Act
at the time it was written but may need 13563, and DOT Policies and does not require an initial (or final)
revisiting as technology has progressed Procedures regulatory flexibility analysis when a
over the past two decades to be a more This proposed rule is a significant rule will not have a significant
practicable solution to prevent damages regulatory action under section 3(f) of economic impact on a substantial
offshore. GulfSafe also suggested that Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735) number of small entities, such an
this is the suitable time to address the and 13563, therefore, was reviewed by analysis is not necessary for this
enforcement issue that goes along with the Office of Management and Budget. proposed rule. Nonetheless, PHMSA
this exemption, since there are large This proposed rule is significant under invites public comment on the proposed
differences in state laws regarding the Regulatory Policies and Procedures rule’s effect on the costs, profitability,
offshore pipelines and enforcement may of the Department of Transportation competitiveness of, and employment in
fall to Federal agencies by default. (44 FR 11034). small entities to ensure that no
Ancillary to this concern, Michigan Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 significant economic impact on a
Consolidated Gas commented that require agencies to regulate in the ‘‘most substantial number of small entities
PHMSA consider the excavator’s ability cost-effective manner,’’ to make a would be overlooked. The following
to call in an unreasonable number of ‘‘reasoned determination that the information is provided to assist in such
tickets per day causing resource benefits of the intended regulation comment:
allocation issues for locate personal. justify its costs,’’ and to develop Description of the small entities to
Also, Michigan PSC recommended that regulations that ‘‘impose the least which the proposed rule will apply.
all meetings between an excavator and burden on society.’’ In general, the enforcement process
operator be documented and digital Because excavation damage is one of set forth in the proposed rule will
pictures be taken at job-sites prior to the major causes of pipeline incidents, potentially apply to any person
excavation activity. the expected benefits of this rulemaking conducting excavation activity in the
action are an increased deterrent to vicinity of a pipeline who fails to call
Response violations of one-call requirements and the one-call center or otherwise violates
PHMSA does not have the authority the attendant reduction in pipeline applicable requirements. The rule does
to enforce state laws. PHMSA believes incidents and accidents caused by not apply to homeowners excavating
that specifying the number of tickets per excavation damage. Failure to use an with hand tools on their own property.
day an excavator can create, as well as available one-call system is a known A precise estimate of the number of
how meetings between excavators and cause of pipeline accidents. small entities is not currently feasible
operators should be documented as part A regulatory evaluation containing a because Federal administrative
of the Federal requirement is not statement of the purpose and need for enforcement will only be considered in
appropriate given the ‘‘backstop’’ (i.e., this rulemaking and an analysis of the states that do not have an adequate
Federal enforcement only in the absence costs and benefits is available in the enforcement program and
of adequate state enforcement) nature docket. determinations on state programs turn
and use of the Federal authority. In Regulatory Flexibility Act on a number of factors that will require
addition, PHMSA believes that a factual analysis on a case-by-case
addressing the exemption for offshore Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act basis. PHMSA seeks any information or
operators is outside the scope of this (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), PHMSA must comment on these issues, as noted
NPRM. consider whether rulemaking actions below.
would have a significant economic Description of the projected reporting,
V. Regulatory Analysis and Notices impact on a substantial number of small recordkeeping and other compliance
entities. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 603, requirements of the proposed rule,
The proposed rule would amend the PHMSA has made an initial
Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations including an estimate of the classes of
determination that the proposed rule small entities that will be subject to the
(49 CFR Parts 190–199) to establish will not have a significant economic
criteria and procedures PHMSA will use requirement and the type of professional
impact on a substantial number of small skills necessary for preparation of the
to determine the adequacy of state entities. This determination is based on
pipeline excavation damage prevention report or record.
the minimal cost to excavators to call
law enforcement program. the one-call center. In addition, the This proposed rule imposes no
proposed rule is procedural in nature additional reporting costs to businesses,
Statutory/Legal Authority for This including small businesses. The
Rulemaking and its purpose is to set forth an
administrative enforcement process for proposed rule is procedural in nature
PHMSA’s general authority to publish actions that are already required. The and its purpose is to set forth an
this proposed rulemaking and prescribe proposed rule would appear to have no administrative enforcement process for
pipeline safety regulations is codified at material effect on the costs or burdens actions that are already required. The
49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq. Section 2(a) of of compliance for regulated entities, costs impacts associated with this
the PIPES Act (Pub. L. 109–468) regardless of size. Thus, the marginal proposed rulemaking would be imposed
authorizes the Secretary of cost, if any, that would be imposed by on Federal and state governments.
Transportation to enforce pipeline the rule on regulated entities, including Identification, to the extent practicable,
of all relevant Federal rules that may
damage prevention requirements against small entities, would not be significant.

persons who engage in excavation Based on the facts available about the duplicate, overlap or conflict with the
activity in violation of such expected impact of this rulemaking, I proposed rule.
requirements provided that, through a certify that this proposed rulemaking PHMSA is unaware of any
proceeding established by rulemaking, will not have a significant economic duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting
the Secretary has determined that the impact on a substantial number of small Federal rules. As noted below, PHMSA
relevant state’s enforcement is entities. PHMSA invites public seeks comments and information about
inadequate to protect safety. comments on this certification. any such rules, as well as any industry
rules or policies that would conflict (2) OMB control number; (3) Current Washington, DC 20503. Comments
with the requirements of the proposed expiration date; (4) Type of request; (5) should be submitted on or prior to June
rule. Abstract of the information collection 1, 2012.
Description of any significant activity; (6) Description of affected
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
alternatives to the proposed rule that public; (7) Estimate of total annual
accomplish the stated objectives of reporting and recordkeeping burden; This proposed rule would not impose
applicable statutes and that minimize and (8) Frequency of collection. The unfunded mandates under the
information collection burden for the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
any significant economic impact of the
following information collection will be 1995. It would not result in costs of
proposed rule on small entities.
revised as follows: $141 million, adjusted for inflation, or
PHMSA seeks comments and more in any one year to either state,
information about any alternatives such Title: Gas Pipeline Safety Program
Certification and Hazardous Liquid local, or tribal governments, in the
as: (1) Establishment of differing aggregate, or to the private sector, and
compliance or reporting requirements or Pipeline Safety Program Certification.
OMB Control Number: 2137–0584. is the least burdensome alternative that
timetables that take into account the achieves the objective of the proposed
resources available to small entities; Current Expiration Date: 6/30/2012.
Abstract: A state must submit an rulemaking.
(2) clarification, consolidation, or
simplification of compliance and annual certification to assume National Environmental Policy Act
reporting requirements under the rule responsibility for regulating intrastate
pipelines, and certain records must be PHMSA analyzed this proposed rule
for such small entities; (3) any in accordance with section 102(2)(c) of
exemption from coverage of the rule, or maintained to demonstrate that the state
is ensuring satisfactory compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act
any part thereof, for such small entities. (42 U.S.C. 4332), the Council on
the pipeline safety regulations. PHMSA
Executive Order 13175 uses that information to evaluate a Environmental Quality regulations (40
state’s eligibility for Federal grants. CFR Parts 1500–1508), and DOT Order
PHMSA has analyzed this proposed 5610.1C, and has preliminarily
rule according to the principles and Affected Public: State and local
governments. determined that this action will not
criteria in Executive Order 13175, significantly affect the quality of the
‘‘Consultation and Coordination With Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping
Burden: human environment. A preliminary
Indian Tribal Governments.’’ Because environmental assessment of this
this proposed rule would not Total Annual Responses: 67.
Total Annual Burden Hours: 4,532 rulemaking is available in the docket
significantly or uniquely affect the and PHMSA invites comment on
communities of the Indian tribal (this estimate includes an increase of
612 hours). environmental impacts of this rule, if
governments or impose substantial any.
direct compliance costs, the funding Frequency of Collection: Annually
and consultation requirements of and occasionally at states’ discretion. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13175 do not apply. Requests for a copy of this PHMSA has analyzed this proposed
information collection should be rule according to the principles and
Paperwork Reduction Act directed to Cameron Satterthwaite, criteria of Executive Order 13132
Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d), PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety (PHP–30), (‘‘Federalism’’). A rule has implications
is required to provide interested Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety for federalism under Executive Order
members of the public and affected Administration (PHMSA), 2nd Floor, 13132 if it has a substantial direct effect
agencies with an opportunity to 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., on state or local governments, on the
comment on information collection and Washington, DC 20590–0001, relationship between the national
recordkeeping requests. PHMSA Telephone (202) 366–4595. government and the states, or on the
estimates that the proposals in this Comments are invited on: distribution of powers and
rulemaking will cause an increase to the (a) The need for the proposed responsibilities among the various
currently approved information collection of information for the proper levels of government.
collection titled ‘‘Gas Pipeline Safety performance of the functions of the The Federal pipeline safety statutes in
Program Certification and Hazardous agency, including whether the 49 U.S.C. 60101, et seq., create a strong
Liquid Pipeline Safety Program information will have practical utility; Federal-state partnership for ensuring
Certification’’ identified under Office of (b) The accuracy of the agency’s the safety of the Nation’s interstate and
Management and Budget (OMB) Control estimate of the burden of the revised intrastate pipelines. That partnership
Number 2137–0584. Based on the collection of information, including the permits states to regulate intrastate
proposals in this rule, PHMSA estimates validity of the methodology and pipelines after they certify to PHMSA,
a 20% increase to states with gas assumptions used; among other things, that they have and
pipeline safety program certifications/ (c) Ways to enhance the quality, are enforcing standards at least as
agreements. PHMSA estimates the utility, and clarity of the information to stringent as the Federal requirements,
increase at 12 hours per respondent for be collected; and and are promoting a damage prevention
a total increase of 612 hour (12 hrs*51 (d) Ways to minimize the burden of program. PHMSA provides Federal
respondents). As a result, PHMSA will the collection of information on those grants to states to cover a large portion
submit an information collection who are to respond, including the use of their pipeline safety program
revision request to OMB for approval of appropriate automated, electronic, expenses, and PHMSA also makes
based on the requirements in this mechanical, or other technological grants available to assist in improving
proposed rule. The information collection techniques. the overall quality and effectiveness of
collection is contained in the pipeline Send comments directly to the Office their damage prevention programs.
safety regulations, 49 CFR Parts 190– of Management and Budget, Office of In recognition of the value of this
199. The following information is Information and Regulatory Affairs, close partnership, PHMSA has made
provided for that information collection: Attn: Desk Officer for the Department of and continues to make every effort to
(1) Title of the information collection; Transportation, 725 17th Street NW., ensure that our state partners have the
opportunity to provide input on this have a significant adverse effect on 196.205 Can PHMSA assess administrative
rulemaking. For example, at the ANPRM supply, distribution, or energy use. civil penalties for violations?
stage, PHMSA sought advice from the Further, the Office of Information and 196.207 What are the maximum
National Association of State Pipeline Regulatory Affairs has not designated administrative civil penalties for
Safety Representatives (NAPSR) and this proposed rule as a significant violations?
offered NAPSR officials the opportunity energy action. 196.209 May other civil enforcement
to meet with PHMSA and discuss issues actions be taken?
Privacy Act Statement 196.211 May criminal penalties be
of concern to the states. As a result of
these consultation efforts with state Anyone may search the electronic imposed?
officials and their comments on the form of all comments received for any Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.
ANPRM, PHMSA became aware of state of our dockets. You may review DOT’s
concerns regarding the rigorousness of complete Privacy Act Statement in the Subpart A—General
the criteria for program effectiveness. Federal Register published on April 11,
PHMSA has taken these concerns into 2000 (70 FR 19477) or visit http:// § 196.1 What is the purpose and scope of
account in developing the proposed dms.dot.gov. this part?
criteria in the NPRM. State and local List of Subjects This part prescribes the minimum
governments will be able to raise any requirements that excavators must
other federalism issues during the 49 CFR Part 196
follow to protect underground pipelines
comment period for this NPRM and we Administrative practice and from excavation-related damage. It also
invite state and local officials with an procedure; Pipeline safety; Reporting establishes an enforcement process for
interest in this rulemaking to comment and recordkeeping requirements.
on any impacts to their governments. violations of these requirements.
Under the proposed rule, Federal 49 CFR Part 198
§ 196.3 Definitions.
administrative enforcement against an Grant programs-transportation;
excavator that violates damage Pipeline safety; Reporting and Damage or excavation damage means
prevention requirements would be taken recordkeeping requirements. any impact that results in the need to
only in the demonstrable absence of For the reasons discussed in the repair or replace a pipeline due to a
enforcement by a state authority. preamble, PHMSA proposes to amend weakening, or the partial or complete
Additionally, the proposed rule would 49 CFR Subchapter D as follows: destruction, of the pipeline, including,
establish a framework for evaluating 1. Part 196 is added to read as follows: but not limited to, the pipe, its
state programs individually so that the protective coating, lateral support,
exercise of Federal administrative PART 196—PROTECTION OF cathodic protection or the housing for
enforcement in one state has no effect UNDERGROUND PIPELINES FROM the line device or facility.
on the ability of all other states to EXCAVATION ACTIVITY
continue to exercise state enforcement Excavation means any operation
authority. This proposed rule would not Subpart A—General using non-mechanical or mechanical
preempt state law in the state where the Sec. equipment or explosives used in the
violation occurred, or any other state, 196.1 What is the purpose and scope of this movement of earth, rock or other
but would authorize Federal part? material below existing grade. This
196.3 Definitions. includes, but is not limited to, augering,
enforcement in the limited instance
explained above. Finally, a state that Subpart B—One-Call Damage Prevention blasting, boring, demolishing, digging,
establishes an effective damage Requirements ditching, dredging, drilling, driving-in,
prevention enforcement program has the Sec. grading, plowing-in, pulling-in, ripping,
ability to be recognized by PHMSA as 196.101 What is the purpose and scope of scraping, trenching, and tunneling. This
having such a program. this subpart? does not include homeowners
For the reasons discussed above, and 196.103 What must an excavator do to
excavating on their own property with
based on the results of our consultations protect underground pipelines from
excavation-related damage? hand tools.
with the states, PHMSA has concluded 196.105 Are there any exceptions to the
the proposed rule will not have a Excavator means any person or legal
requirement to use one-call before entity, public or private, proposing to or
substantial direct effect on the states, digging?
the relationship between the national 196.107 What must an excavator do if a
engaging in excavation.
government and the states, or the pipeline is damaged by excavation One-call means a notification system
distribution of power and activity? through which a person can notify
responsibilities among the various 196.109 What must an excavator do if pipeline operators of planned
levels of government. In addition, this damage to a pipeline from excavation
activity causes a leak where product is
excavation to facilitate the locating and
proposed rule does not impose released from the pipeline? marking of any pipelines in the
substantial direct compliance costs on 196.111 What if a pipeline operator fails to excavation area.
state and local governments. respond to a locate request or fails to Pipeline means all parts of those
Accordingly, the consultation and accurately locate and mark its pipeline?
funding requirements of Executive physical facilities through which gas,
Subpart C—Administrative Enforcement carbon dioxide, or a hazardous liquid
Order 13132 do not apply. Process moves in transportation, including, but
Executive Order 13211 Sec. not limited to, pipe, valves, and other
This proposed rule is not a 196.201 What is the purpose and scope of appurtenance attached or connected to
this subpart?
‘‘significant energy action’’ under pipe, pumping units, compressor units,
196.203 What is the administrative process
Executive Order 13211 (Actions PHMSA will use to conduct enforcement metering stations, regulator stations,
Concerning Regulations That proceedings for alleged violations of delivery stations, holders, fabricated
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, excavation damage prevention assemblies, and breakout tanks.
Distribution, or Use). It is not likely to requirements?
Subpart B—One-Call Damage emergency response authorities by extent of the violation and to assess a
Prevention Requirements calling 911. Upon calling the 911 civil penalty.
emergency telephone number, the
§ 196.101 What is the purpose and scope excavator may exercise discretion as to § 196.207 What are the maximum
of this subpart? administrative civil penalties for violations?
whether to request emergency response
This subpart prescribes the minimum personnel be dispatched to the damage The maximum administrative civil
requirements that excavators must site. penalties that may be imposed are
follow to protect underground pipelines specified in 49 U.S.C. § 60122.
from excavation-related damage. § 196.111 What if a pipeline operator fails
to respond to a locate request or fails to § 196.209 May other civil enforcement
§ 196.103 What must an excavator do to accurately locate and mark its pipeline? actions be taken?
protect underground pipelines from
PHMSA may enforce existing Whenever the Associate
excavation-related damage?
requirements applicable to pipeline Administrator, OPS has reason to
Prior to commencing excavation believe that a person has engaged, is
operators, including those specified in
activity where an underground gas or engaged, or is about to engage in any act
49 CFR 192.614 and 195.442 and 49
hazardous liquid pipeline may be or practice constituting a violation of
U.S.C. 60114 if a pipeline operator fails
present, the excavator must: any provision of 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.,
to respond to a locate request or fails to
(a) Use an available one-call system or any regulations issued thereunder,
accurately locate and mark its pipeline.
before excavating to notify operators of PHMSA, or the person to whom the
The limitation in § 60114(f) does not
underground pipeline facilities of the authority has been delegated, may
apply to enforcement taken against
timing and location of the intended request the Attorney General to bring an
pipeline operators and excavators
excavation; action in the appropriate U.S. District
working for pipeline operators.
(b) If underground pipelines exist in Court for such relief as is necessary or
the area, wait for the pipeline operator Subpart C—Enforcement appropriate, including mandatory or
to arrive at the excavation site and prohibitive injunctive relief, interim
establish and mark the location of its § 196.201 What is the purpose and scope
equitable relief, civil penalties, and
underground pipeline facilities before of this subpart?
punitive damages as provided under 49
excavating; This subpart describes the U.S.C. 60120.
(c) Excavate with proper regard for the enforcement authority and sanctions
marked location of pipelines an operator exercised by the Associate § 196.211 May criminal penalties be
has established by respecting the imposed for violations?
Administrator, OPS for achieving and
markings and taking all practicable maintaining pipeline safety under this Yes. Criminal penalties may be
steps to prevent excavation damage to Part. It also prescribes the procedures imposed as specified in 49 U.S.C.
the pipeline; and governing the exercise of that authority 60123.
(d) Make additional use of one-call as and the imposition of those sanctions.
necessary to obtain locating and PART 198—REGULATIONS FOR
marking before excavating if additional § 196.203 What is the administrative GRANTS TO AID STATE PIPELINE
excavations will be conducted at other process PHMSA will use to conduct SAFETY PROGRAMS
locations. enforcement proceedings for alleged
violations of excavation damage prevention 2. The authority citation for part 198
§ 196.105 Are there any exceptions to the requirements? is amended to read as follows:
requirement to use one-call before digging?
PHMSA will use the existing Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.; 49
Homeowners using only hand tools, adjudication process for alleged U.S.C. 6101 et seq.; 49 CFR 1.53.
rather than mechanized excavating pipeline safety violations set forth in 49
equipment, on their own property are CFR Part 190, Subpart B. This process 3. 49 CFR Part 198 is amended by
not required to use a one-call prior to provides for notification that a probable adding a new Subpart D to read as
digging. violation has been committed, a 30-day follows:
§ 196.107 What must an excavator do if a period to respond including the Subpart D—State Damage Prevention
opportunity to request an administrative Enforcement Programs
pipeline is damaged by excavation activity?
hearing, the issuance of a final order, Sec.
If a pipeline is damaged in any way
and the opportunity to petition for 198.51 What is the purpose and scope of
by excavation activity, the excavator this subpart?
reconsideration.
must report such damage to the pipeline 198.53 When and how will PHMSA
operator, whether or not a leak occurs, § 196.205 Can PHMSA assess evaluate state damage prevention
at the earliest practicable moment administrative civil penalties for violations? enforcement programs?
following discovery of the damage. 198.55 What criteria will PHMSA use in
Yes. When the Associate evaluating the effectiveness of state
§ 196.109 What must an excavator do if Administrator, OPS has reason to damage prevention enforcement
damage to a pipeline from excavation believe that a person has violated any programs?
activity causes a leak where product is provision of the 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq. 198.57 What is the process PHMSA will use
released from the pipeline? or any regulation or order issued to notify a state that its damage
If damage to a pipeline from thereunder, including a violation of prevention enforcement program appears
excavation activity causes the release of excavation damage prevention to be inadequate?

any flammable, toxic, or corrosive gas or requirements under this Part and 49 198.59 How may a state respond to a notice
liquid from the pipeline that may U.S.C. 60114(d) in a state with an of inadequacy?
198.61 How is a state notified of PHMSA’s
endanger life or cause serious bodily excavation damage prevention law final decision?
harm or damage to property or the enforcement program PHMSA has 198.63 How may a state with an inadequate
environment, the excavator must deemed inadequate under 49 CFR Part damage prevention law enforcement
immediately report the release of 198, Subpart D, PHMSA may conduct a program seek reconsideration by
hazardous products to appropriate proceeding to determine the nature and PHMSA?
Subpart D— State Damage Prevention § 198.55 What criteria will PHMSA use in (b) PHMSA may also consider
Enforcement Programs evaluating the effectiveness of state individual enforcement actions taken by
damage prevention enforcement programs? a state in evaluating the effectiveness of
§ 198.51 What is the purpose and scope of (a) PHMSA will use the following a state’s damage prevention enforcement
this subpart? criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of program.
a state excavation damage prevention
This subpart establishes standards for § 198.57 What is the process PHMSA will
enforcement program:
effective state damage prevention (1) Does the state have the authority use to notify a state that its damage
enforcement programs and prescribes to enforce its state excavation damage prevention enforcement program appears
the administrative procedures available prevention law through civil penalties? to be inadequate?
to a state that elects to contest a notice (2) Has the state designated a state PHMSA will issue a notice of
of inadequacy. agency or other body as the authority inadequacy to the state in accordance
responsible for enforcement of the state with 49 CFR § 190.5. The notice will
§ 198.53 When and how will PHMSA excavation damage prevention law?
evaluate state excavation damage state the basis for PHMSA’s
(3) Is the state assessing civil penalties determination that the state’s damage
prevention law enforcement programs?
for violations at levels sufficient to prevention enforcement program
PHMSA conducts annual program ensure compliance and is the state appears inadequate for purposes of this
evaluations and certification reviews of making publicly available information subpart and set forth the state’s response
state pipeline safety programs. PHMSA that demonstrates the effectiveness of options.
will also conduct annual reviews of the state’s enforcement program?
state excavation damage prevention law (4) Does the enforcement authority (if § 198.59 How may a state respond to a
enforcement programs. PHMSA will use one exists) have a reliable mechanism notice of inadequacy?
(e.g., mandatory reporting, complaint-
the criteria described in § 198.55 as the A state receiving a notice of
driven reporting, etc.) for learning about
basis for the reviews, utilizing inadequacy will have 30 days from
excavation damage to underground
information obtained from any state facilities? receipt of the notice to submit a written
agency or office with a role in the state’s (5) Does the state employ excavation response to the PHMSA official that
excavation damage prevention law damage investigation practices that are issued the notice. In its response, the
enforcement program. If PHMSA finds a adequate to determine the at-fault party state may include information and
state’s enforcement program inadequate, when excavation damage to explanations concerning the alleged
PHMSA may take immediate underground facilities occurs? inadequacy or contest the allegation of
enforcement against excavators in that (6) At a minimum, does the state’s inadequacy and request the notice be
state. The state will have five years from excavation damage prevention law withdrawn.
the date of the finding to make program require the following: § 198.61 How is a state notified of
improvements that meet PHMSA’s a. Excavators may not engage in PHMSA’s final decision?
criteria for minimum adequacy. A state excavation activity without first using
that fails to establish an adequate an available one-call notification system PHMSA will issue a final decision on
to establish the location of underground whether the state’s damage prevention
enforcement program in accordance
facilities in the excavation area. enforcement program has been found
with 49 CFR 198.55 within five years of
b. Excavators may not engage in inadequate in accordance with 49 CFR
the finding of inadequacy may be excavation activity in disregard of the 190.5.
subject to reduced grant funding marked location of a pipeline facility as
established under 49 U.S.C. 60107. The established by a pipeline operator. § 198.63 How may a state with an
amount of the reduction will be c. An excavator who causes damage to inadequate excavation damage prevention
determined using the same process law enforcement program seek
a pipeline facility: reconsideration by PHMSA?
PHMSA currently uses to distribute the i. Must report the damage to the
grant funding; PHMSA will factor the owner or operator of the facility at the At any time following a finding of
findings from the annual review of the earliest practical moment following inadequacy, the state may petition
excavation damage prevention discovery of the damage; and PHMSA to reconsider such finding
enforcement program into the 49 U.S.C. ii. If the damage results in the escape based on changed circumstances
60107 grant funding distribution to state of any flammable, toxic, or corrosive gas including improvements in the state’s
pipeline safety programs. The amount of or liquid that may endanger life or cause enforcement program. Upon receiving a
the reduction in 49 U.S.C. 60107 grant serious bodily harm or damage to petition, PHMSA will reconsider its
funding shall not exceed 10% of prior property, must promptly report to other finding of inadequacy promptly and
appropriate authorities by calling the will notify the state of its decision on
year funding. If a state fails to
911 emergency telephone number or reconsideration promptly but no later
implement an adequate enforcement another emergency telephone number.
program within five years of a finding than the time of the next annual
(7) Does the state limit exemptions for certification review.
of inadequacy, the Governor of that state excavators from its excavation damage
may petition the Administrator of prevention law? A state must provide to Issued in Washington, DC on March 26,
PHMSA, in writing, for a temporary 2012.
PHMSA a written justification for any
waiver of the penalty, provided the exemptions for excavators from state Jeffrey D. Wiese,
petition includes a clear plan of action damage prevention requirements. Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
and timeline for achieving program PHMSA will make the written [FR Doc. 2012–7550 Filed 3–30–12; 8:45 am]
adequacy. justifications available to the public. BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices 17119
consecutive years of data, comparing the following: (1) That each individual be DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
experiences of drivers in the first 2 years physically examined every year (a) by
with their experiences in the final year. an ophthalmologist or optometrist who Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Applying principles from these attests that the vision in the better eye Safety Administration
studies to the past 3-year record of the continues to meet the requirement in 49 [Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0039]
twelve applicants, two of the drivers CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) by a medical
were involved in crashes and none were examiner who attests that the individual Pipeline Safety: Cast Iron Pipe
convicted of moving violations in a is otherwise physically qualified under (Supplementary Advisory Bulletin)
CMV. All the applicants achieved a
49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
record of safety while driving with their
provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s Materials Safety Administration
vision impairment, demonstrating the
likelihood that they have adapted their or optometrist’s report to the medical (PHMSA), DOT.
driving skills to accommodate their examiner at the time of the annual
ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory
condition. As the applicants’ ample medical examination; and (3) that each
Bulletin.
driving histories with their vision individual provide a copy of the annual
deficiencies are good predictors of medical certification to the employer for SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an advisory
future performance, FMCSA concludes retention in the driver’s qualification bulletin to owners and operators of
their ability to drive safely can be file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s natural gas cast iron distribution
projected into the future. qualification file if he/she is self- pipelines and state pipeline safety
We believe that the applicants’ employed. The driver must have a copy representatives. Recent deadly
intrastate driving experience and history of the certification when driving, for explosions in Philadelphia and
provide an adequate basis for predicting presentation to a duly authorized Allentown, Pennsylvania involving cast
their ability to drive safely in interstate Federal, State, or local enforcement iron pipelines installed in 1942 and
commerce. Intrastate driving, like official. 1928, respectively, gained national
interstate operations, involves attention and highlight the need for
substantial driving on highways on the Discussion of Comments continued safety improvements to aging
interstate system and on other roads gas pipeline systems. This bulletin is an
built to interstate standards. Moreover, FMCSA received no comments in this
update of two prior Alert Notices (ALN–
driving in congested urban areas proceeding.
91–02; October 11, 1991 and ALN–92–
exposes the driver to more pedestrian Conclusion 02; June 26, 1992) covering the
and vehicular traffic than exists on continued use of cast iron pipe in
interstate highways. Faster reaction to Based upon its evaluation of the natural gas distribution pipeline
traffic and traffic signals is generally twelve exemption applications, FMCSA systems. This advisory bulletin
required because distances between exempts Eugenio V. Bermudez (MA), reiterates two prior Alert Notices which
them are more compact. These John A. Carroll, Jr. (AL), Mark W. remain relevant, urges owners and
conditions tax visual capacity and Crocker (TN), Johnny Dillard (SC), Keith operators to conduct a comprehensive
driver response just as intensely as J. Haaf (VA), Edward M. Jurek (NY), review of their cast iron distribution
interstate driving conditions. The Allen J. Kunze (ND), Jack W. Murphy, pipelines and replacement programs
veteran drivers in this proceeding have Jr. (OH), Mark A. Smalls (GA), Glenn R. and accelerate pipeline repair,
operated CMVs safely under those Theis (MN), Peter A. Troyan (MI) and rehabilitation and replacement of high-
conditions for at least 3 years, most for Gary Vines (AL) from the vision risk pipelines, requests state agencies to
much longer. Their experience and consider enhancements to cast iron
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
driving records lead us to believe that replacement plans and programs, and
subject to the requirements cited above
each applicant is capable of operating in alerts owners and operators of the
interstate commerce as safely as he/she (49 CFR 391.64(b)).
pipeline safety requirements for the
has been performing in intrastate In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) investigation of failures. In addition, the
commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds and 31315, each exemption will be valid latest survey and reporting requirements
that exempting these applicants from for 2 years unless revoked earlier by of cast iron pipelines required by the
the vision requirement in 49 CFR FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty,
391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level if: (1) The person fails to comply with and Job Creation Act of 2011 are
of safety equal to that existing without the terms and conditions of the included for information.
the exemption. For this reason, the exemption; (2) the exemption has ADDRESSES: This document can be
Agency is granting the exemptions for resulted in a lower level of safety than viewed on the Office of Pipeline Safety
the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C. was maintained before it was granted; or home page at: http://ops.dot.gov.
31136(e) and 31315 to the twelve (3) continuation of the exemption would
applicants listed in the notice of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
not be consistent with the goals and Gilliam, Director, Engineering and
February 6, 2012 (77 FR 5874). objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
We recognize that the vision of an Research, 202–366–0568 or by email at
applicant may change and affect his/her If the exemption is still effective at the Jeffery.Gilliam@dot.gov.
ability to operate a CMV as safely as in end of the 2-year period, the person may SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
the past. As a condition of the apply to FMCSA for a renewal under
procedures in effect at that time. I. Background
exemption, therefore, FMCSA will
impose requirements on the twelve Issued on: March 9, 2012. On January 18, 2011, an explosion
individuals consistent with the and fire caused the death of one gas
Larry W. Minor,
grandfathering provisions applied to utility employee and injuries to several
drivers who participated in the Associate Administration for Policy. other people while gas utility crews
Agency’s vision waiver program. [FR Doc. 2012–7084 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] were responding to a natural gas leak in
Those requirements are found at 49 BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P Philadelphia, PA. A preliminary
CFR 391.64(b) and include the investigation found a circumferential
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:14 Mar 22, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1
17120 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices
break on a 12-inch cast iron distribution remove from service cast iron pipe In addition, PHMSA reminds owners and
main that was installed in 1942, and that may threaten the public. operators of cast iron distribution pipelines
was operating at 17 pounds per square of their responsibility for the investigation of
Alert Notice (ALN–92–02) all failures and that each operator must
inch gauge (psig) pressure at the time of
incident. An investigation continues On June 26, 1992, RSPA issued a establish procedures for analyzing incidents
toward finding the cause. Pipeline Safety Alert Notice (ALN–92– and failures, including laboratory
On February 9, 2011, five people lost 02) as a Supplementary Alert Notice to examination of failed pipe segments and
their lives and a number of homes were the 1991 Alert Notice. The equipment, where appropriate, for the
destroyed and other properties impacted Supplementary Alert Notice reminded purpose of determining the causes of the
pipeline operators of the requirement at failure and minimizing the possibility of a
by an explosion and subsequent fire in
49 CFR 192.613 that each operator have recurrence [192.617]. Owners and operators
Allentown, PA. A preliminary
a procedure for continuing surveillance are required to review pipeline records,
investigation found a crack in a 12-inch
of its pipeline facilities to identify validate safe pipeline operating pressure
cast iron natural gas distribution main
problems and take appropriate action levels and accelerate repairs and replacement
that was installed in 1928, and was where improvements in safety are necessary.
operating at less than 1 psig at the time concerning failures, leakage, history,
corrosion, and other unusual operating The Distribution Integrity Management
of incident. The crack was located Program (DIMP) requires natural gas
below grade near the destroyed homes. and maintenance conditions. This
distribution companies to develop and
An investigation continues toward procedure should also include
implement DIMP for the pipelines they own,
finding the cause. surveillance of cast iron to identify
operate or maintain.
problems and to take appropriate action
Alert Notice (ALN–91–02) PHMSA is asking owners and operators of
concerning graphitization. cast iron distribution pipelines and state
On October 11, 1991, PHMSA’s II. Advisory Bulletin (ADB–2012–05) pipeline safety representatives to consider
predecessor agency, the Research and the following where improvements in safety
Special Programs Administration To: Each Owner and Operator of a Natural
are necessary:
(RSPA), issued Pipeline Safety Alert Gas Cast Iron Distribution Pipeline Facility
and State Pipeline Safety Representatives. —Request, review and monitor operator cast
Notice (ALN–91–02) alerting pipeline Subject: Cast Iron Pipe (Supplementary iron replacement plans and programs,
operators of National Transportation Advisory Bulletin). actively encourage operators to develop
Safety Board recommendation P–91–12 Purpose: To Address Continued Concerns and continually update and follow their
in response to the August 1990 Rising Out of Recent Cast Iron Incidents. plans, and consider establishment of
explosion and fire in Allentown, PA, Advisory: mandated replacement programs.
caused by a crack in a 4-inch cast iron On October 11, 1991, Alert Notice (ALN– —Establish accelerated leakage survey
gas main. The recommendation stated: 91–02) was issued reminding all operators of
frequencies or leak testing considering
natural gas distribution systems to have a
‘‘Require each gas operator to implement a program to identify and replace cast iron results from failure investigations and
program, based on factors such as age, pipe piping systems that may threaten public environmental risk factors.
diameter, operating pressure, soil safety. RSPA also informed operators of —Focus pipeline safety efforts on identifying
corrosiveness, existing graphitic damage, leak guidelines and computer programs that were the highest risk pipe.
history, burial depth, and external loading, to available to help operators determine the —Use rate adjustments and flexible rate
identify and replace in a planned, timely serviceability of cast iron pipe and schedule recovery mechanisms to incentivize
manner cast iron piping systems that may its replacement or retirement. On June 26, pipeline rehabilitation, repair and
threaten public safety.’’ 1992, Alert Notice (ALN–92–02) was issued replacement programs.
The Alert Notice informed informing pipeline operators that § 192.613 —Strengthen pipeline safety inspections,
required each operator to have a procedure accident investigations and enforcement
distribution pipeline operators with cast for continuing surveillance of its pipeline
iron pipe of the following: actions.
facilities to identify problems and take
—Install interior/home methane gas alarms.
—The Gas Piping Technology appropriate action concerning failures,
Committee developed guide material leakage, history, corrosion, and other unusual The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty,
to assist them in developing operating and maintenance conditions. This and Job Creation Act of 2011, was signed into
procedures for determining the procedure should also include surveillance law (Pub. L. 112–90) on January 3, 2012.
of cast iron to identify problems and to take Section 7 of the new law requires the U.S.
serviceability of the cast iron pipe and appropriate action concerning graphitization.
to identify the cast iron pipe segments Department of Transportation to measure
The two Alert Notices remain relevant, and every two years the progress that owners and
that may need replacement. reaffirm the need for operators of gas cast operators of pipeline facilities have made in
—Computer programs are commercially iron distribution systems to maintain an
adopting and implementing their plans for
available that can be used to develop effective cast iron management program.
PHMSA urges owners and operators to the safe management and replacement of cast
a systematic replacement program for iron gas pipelines. Additionally, not later
cast iron pipe. conduct a comprehensive review of their cast
iron distribution pipeline systems and than December 31, 2013, the Secretary of
—Pipeline safety regulations require Transportation must submit to Congress a
replacement programs and to accelerate
that cast iron pipe on which general pipeline repair, rehabilitation, and report that — (1) Identifies the total mileage
graphitization is found to a degree replacement of aging and high-risk pipe. of cast iron gas pipelines in the United
where a fracture might result must be Recent incidents, such as the deadly States; and (2) evaluates the progress that
replaced. In addition, the regulations explosions in Philadelphia and Allentown, owners and operators of pipeline facilities
require that cast iron pipe that is Pennsylvania involving cast iron pipe have made in implementing their plans for
excavated must be protected against failures, have focused attention on our
the safe management and replacement of cast

damage. An operator’s compliance Nation’s aging pipeline infrastructure and
iron gas pipelines.
with the above guidelines and code underline the importance of having valid
methods for evaluating the integrity of PHMSA is committed to working with
requirements can be enhanced by pipelines to better ensure public safety. owners and operators of natural gas cast iron
incorporating all of the operator’s cast PHMSA recommends owners and operators distribution pipelines and state pipeline
iron responsibilities in an effective of natural gas cast iron pipelines assure their safety representatives to ensure our Nation’s
cast iron management program that is replacement program models are based on pipeline infrastructure is safe and well-
designed to identify and replace or relevant risk factors. maintained.
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices 17121
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 20, The MG Principals will retain the Class RailAmerica et al. states that: (1) W&C
2012. B Common Units of TransRail, thereby does not connect with any of
Jeffrey D. Wiese, retaining a 30% interest in TransRail, RailAmerica’s subsidiary railroads; (2)
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. though they will not retain control or the proposed transaction is not part of
[FR Doc. 2012–7080 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] the power to control W&C. a series of anticipated transactions to
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P Fortress’ noncarrier affiliate, RR connect W&C and any of RailAmerica’s
Acquisition, currently owns about 60% subsidiary railroads; and (3) the
of the publicly traded shares and proposed transaction does not involve a
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION controls the noncarrier RailAmerica, Class I rail carrier. The proposed
which directly controls the noncarrier transaction is therefore exempt from the
Surface Transportation Board Palm Beach, which directly controls the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C.
[Docket No. FD 35605] noncarrier RTC. 11323 pursuant to 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(2).
RailAmerica states that it controls the Under 49 U.S.C. 10502(g), the Board
RailAmerica, Inc., Palm Beach Rail following Class III rail carriers: (1) may not use its exemption authority to
Holding, Inc., RailAmerica Alabama & Gulf Coast Railway LLC; (2) relieve a rail carrier of its statutory
Transportation Corp., RailTex, Inc., Arizona & California Railroad Company; obligation to protect the interests of its
Fortress Investment Group, LLC, and (3) Bauxite & Northern Railway employees. Because the transaction
RR Acquisition Holding, LLC—Control Company; (4) California Northern involves the control of one or more
Exemption—Wellsboro & Corning Railroad Company; (5) Cascade and Class III rail carriers and one Class II rail
Railroad, LLC Columbia River Railroad Company; (6) carrier, the transaction is subject to the
Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad, Inc.; labor protective requirements of 49
RailAmerica, Inc. (RailAmerica), Palm U.S.C. 11326(b) and Wisconsin Central
(7) The Central Railroad Company of
Beach Rail Holding, Inc. (Palm Beach), Ltd.—Acquisition Exemption—Lines of
Indiana; (8) Central Railroad Company
RailAmerica Transportation Corp. Union Pacific Railroad, 2 S.T.B. 218
of Indianapolis; (9) Connecticut
(RTC), RailTex, Inc. (RailTex), Fortress (1997).
Southern Railroad, Inc.; (10) Conecuh
Investment Group, LLC (Fortress), and If the verified notice contains false or
Valley Railway, LLC; (11) Dallas,
RR Acquisition Holding, LLC (RR misleading information, the exemption
Garland & Northeastern Railroad, Inc.;
Acquisition) (collectively, RailAmerica is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the
(12) Delphos Terminal Railroad
et al.), have filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d)
Company, Inc.; (13) Eastern Alabama
exemption to acquire indirect control of may be filed at any time. The filing of
Railway, LLC; (14) Huron & Eastern
the Wellsboro & Corning Railroad, LLC a petition to revoke will not
Railway Company, Inc.; (15) Indiana &
(W&C), a Class III rail carrier, through automatically stay the effectiveness of
Ohio Railway Company; (16) Indiana
the acquisition of control of TransRail the exemption. Petitions to stay must be
Southern Railroad, LLC; (17) Kiamichi
Holdings, LLC (TransRail), the parent of filed by March 30, 2012 (at least seven
Railroad Company, LLC; (18) Kyle
W&C, by RailTex. days before the exemption becomes
Railroad Company; (19) The Massena
The proposed transaction is effective).
Terminal Railroad Company; (20) Mid- An original and ten copies of all
scheduled to be consummated on or
Michigan Railroad, Inc.; (21) Missouri & pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD
after April 7, 2012 (30 days after the
Northern Arkansas Railroad Company, 35605 must be filed with the Surface
notice of exemption was filed).
Inc.; (22) New England Central Railroad, Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW.,
W&C acquired the assets of the
Inc.; (23) North Carolina & Virginia Washington, DC 20423–0001. In
Wellsboro & Corning Railroad Co.1 W&C
Railroad Company, LLC; (24) Otter Tail addition, a copy of each pleading must
owns and operates 35.5 miles of track
Valley Railroad Company, Inc.; (25) be served on: Louis E. Gitomer, 600
between Wellsboro, PA., milepost
Point Comfort & Northern Railway Baltimore Avenue, Suite 301, Towson,
109.90, and Erwin, N.Y., milepost 74.70,
Company; (26) Puget Sound & Pacific MD 21204.
in Tioga County, PA., and Steuben
Railroad; (27) Rockdale, Sandow & Board decisions and notices are
County, N.Y. W&C interchanges traffic
Southern Railroad Company; (28) San available on our Web site at
with the Norfolk Southern Railway
Diego & Imperial Valley Railroad www.stb.dot.gov.
Company and the Canadian Pacific
Company, Inc.; (29) San Joaquin Valley
Railway Company. Decided: March 20, 2012.
Railroad Company; (30) South Carolina
According to the verified notice of By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell,
Central Railroad Company, LLC; (31)
exemption, RailTex entered a Unit Director, Office of Proceedings.
Three Notch Railway, LLC; (32) Toledo,
Purchase Agreement dated January 31, Raina S. White,
Peoria & Western Railway Corporation;
2012 (the Agreement), with (1) Clearance Clerk.
(33) Ventura County Railroad Corp.; and
TransRail, (2) Industrial Waste Group,
(34) Wiregrass Central Railway, LLC.2 [FR Doc. 2012–7054 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am]
LLC (IWG), (3) Wellsboro & Corning
Railroad Co., and (4) A. Thomas Myles Further, Fortress, on behalf of other BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
III, A. Thomas Myles IV, and William equity funds managed by it and its
Myles (the MG Principals). The MG affiliates, directly controls the
noncarrier FECR Rail LLC, which DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Principals own TransRail, and TransRail
owns W&C and the successor to IWG. directly controls FEC Rail Corp., which
Surface Transportation Board
Under the Agreement, RailTex will directly controls Florida East Coast
Railway, LLC, a Class II rail carrier. [Docket No. EP 290 (Sub-No. 5) (2012–2)]
acquire 100% of the Class A Common

Units of TransRail, giving RailTex a Quarterly Rail Cost Adjustment Factor
2 On February 3, 2012, in Docket No. FD 35592,
70% ownership interest in TransRail
RailAmerica et al. filed a petition for exemption
and control of W&C through TransRail. AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board,
from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C.
11323–25 to acquire control of Marquette Rail, LLC, Department of Transportation.
1 Wellsboro & Corning R.R.—Acquis. & Operation a Class III rail carrier. The Board issued a notice on ACTION: Approval of rail cost adjustment
Exemption—Wellsboro & Corning R.R., FD 35595 February 28, 2012, instituting an exemption factor.
(STB served Feb. 22, 2012). proceeding pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b).
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 16471
relationship(s) of those entities that are percent of the value of the bidding arrangements, spectrum resale
its affiliates based solely on paragraph credit; (including wholesale) arrangements,
(c)(5)(i)(C) of this section if those (C) A transfer in year 4 of the license and any other relevant agreements
affiliates entered into such material term will result in a forfeiture of 50 (including letters of intent), oral or
relationship(s) before April 25, 2006, percent of the value of the bidding written;
and are subject to a contractual credit; * * * * *
prohibition preventing them from (D) A transfer in year 5 of the license [FR Doc. 2012–6946 Filed 3–20–12; 8:45 am]
contributing to the applicant’s total term will result in a forfeiture of 25 BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
financing. percent of the value of the bidding
* * * * * credit; and
(j) Designated entities must describe (E) For a transfer in year 6 or DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
on their long-form applications how thereafter, there will be no payment.
they satisfy the requirements for (ii) These payments will have to be Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
eligibility for designated entity status, paid to the United States Treasury as a Safety Administration
and must list and summarize on their condition of approval of the assignment,
long form applications all agreements transfer, ownership change or reportable 49 CFR Parts 191, 192, 193 and 195
that affect designated entity status such eligibility event (see § 1.2114).
[Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0001]
as partnership agreements, shareholder * * * * *
agreements, management agreements, ■ 4. Section 1.2112 is amended by Pipeline Safety: Implementation of the
spectrum leasing arrangements, revising paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and National Registry of Pipeline and
spectrum resale (including wholesale) (b)(2)(iii) to read as follows: Liquefied Natural Gas Operators
arrangements, and all other agreements
including oral agreements, establishing § 1.2112 Ownership disclosure AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
as applicable, de facto or de jure control requirements for applications. Materials Safety Administration
of the entity or the presence or absence * * * * * (PHMSA), DOT.
of attributable material relationships. (b) * * * ACTION: Issuance of Advisory Bulletin.
Designated entities also must provide (1) * * *
the date(s) on which they entered into (iii) List and summarize all SUMMARY: This notice advises owners
of the agreements listed. In addition, agreements or instruments (with and operators of pipeline facilities of
designated entities must file with their appropriate references to specific PHMSA’s plan for implementing the
long-form applications a copy of each provisions in the text of such national registry of pipeline and
such agreement. In order to enable the agreements and instruments) that liquefied natural gas operators. This
Commission to audit designated entity support the applicant’s eligibility as a notice provides updates to the
eligibility on an ongoing basis, small business under the applicable information contained in a PHMSA
designated entities that are awarded designated entity provisions, including Advisory Bulletin published on January
eligibility must, for the term of the the establishment of de facto or de jure 13, 2012 (77 FR 2126).
license, maintain at their facilities or control or the presence or absence of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
with their designated agents the lists, attributable material relationships. Such Jamerson Pender, Information Resources
summaries, dates and copies of agreements and instruments include Manager, 202–366–0218 or by email at
agreements required to be identified and articles of incorporation and by-laws, Jamerson.Pender@dot.gov.
provided to the Commission pursuant to partnership agreements, shareholder SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
this paragraph and to § 1.2114. agreements, voting or other trust
agreements, management agreements, I. Background
* * * * *
franchise agreements, spectrum leasing On November 26, 2010, PHMSA
■ 3. Section 1.2111 is revised by
arrangements, spectrum resale published a final rule in the Federal
removing paragraph (d)(2)(i) and
(including wholesale) arrangements, Register (75 FR 72878) titled: ‘‘Pipeline
redesignating paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and
and any other relevant agreements Safety: Updates to Pipeline and
(iii) as paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (ii) and
(including letters of intent), oral or Liquefied Natural Gas Reporting
by revising them to read as follows:
written; Requirements.’’ That final rule added
§ 1.2111 Assignment or transfer of control: * * * * * two new sections, 49 CFR 191.22 and
unjust enrichment. (2) * * * 195.64, to the pipeline safety regulations
* * * * * (iii) List and summarize all that concerned the establishment of a
(d) * * * agreements or instruments (with national registry of pipeline and
(2) Payment schedule. (i) The amount appropriate references to specific liquefied natural gas (LNG) operators.
of payments made pursuant to provisions in the text of such New operators use the national registry
paragraph (d)(1) of this section will be agreements and instruments) that to obtain an Operator Identification
reduced over time as follows: support the applicant’s eligibility as a (OPID) Number and existing operators
(A) A transfer in the first two years of small business under the applicable use it to notify PHMSA of certain
the license term will result in a designated entity provisions, including actions, including company name
forfeiture of 100 percent of the value of the establishment of de facto or de jure changes, certain construction activities,
the bidding credit (or in the case of very control or the presence or absence of and project planning.
small businesses transferring to small attributable material relationships. Such The national pipeline operator
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
businesses, 100 percent of the difference agreements and instruments include registry became effective on January 1,
between the bidding credit received by articles of incorporation and by-laws, 2012. In compliance with the Paperwork
the former and the bidding credit for partnership agreements, shareholder Reduction Act requirements, PHMSA
which the latter is eligible); agreements, voting or other trust issued a 60-day Federal Register notice
(B) A transfer in year 3 of the license agreements, management agreements, on December 13, 2010 (75 FR 77694),
term will result in a forfeiture of 75 franchise agreements, spectrum leasing and a 30-day Federal Register notice on
VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:17 Mar 20, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM 21MRR1
16472 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 21, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
November 10, 2011 (76 FR 70217). The to master meter and small LPG DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
purpose of these notices was to gather operators in existence prior to December
and respond to comments on the actual 31, 2011. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
forms used to collect information for the Administration
national pipeline operator registry. Notifications—§§ 191.22(c) and
PHMSA is issuing this advisory 195.64(c) 50 CFR Part 648
bulletin to clarify the implementation of
On January 1, 2012, PHMSA began [Docket No. 110707371–2136–02]
the national pipeline operator registry.
collecting fillable pdf versions of RIN 0648–BB28
II. Advisory Bulletin (ADB–2012–04) Notifications (Form F 1000.2). Starting
To: Owners and Operators of Pipeline March 27, 2012, operators will be able Fisheries of the Northeastern United
and LNG Facilities. to submit notifications online through States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and
Subject: Implementation of the ODES, and PHMSA will enter all of the Butterfish Fisheries; Specifications
National Registry of Pipeline and LNG pdf versions of the notifications into and Management Measures
Operators. ODES shortly thereafter. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Advisory: This notice advises owners Hazardous liquid pipeline operators Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
and operators of pipeline facilities of
are advised to disregard the notification Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
PHMSA’s plan for implementing the
requirement in § 195.64(c)(1)(iii). That Commerce.
national registry of pipeline and LNG
operators. This notice provides updates provision requires notification for ACTION: Final rule; interim
to the information contained in a construction of any new pipeline specifications; request for comment.
PHMSA Advisory Bulletin on the same facility without regard to cost. Section
195.64(c)(1)(i) also requires notification SUMMARY: NMFS is implementing final
subject published on January 13, 2012 2012 specifications and management
(77 FR 2126). for construction of a new pipeline
facility, but only for those projects with measures for Atlantic mackerel
OPID Assignment Requests— a cost of $10 million or more. PHMSA (mackerel), and 2012–2014
§§ 191.22(a) and 195.64(a) specifications for Illex and longfin
only wants notification of hazardous
squid, and interim final 2012
From January 1, 2012, to January 27, liquid pipeline facility construction
specifications and management
2012, PHMSA collected fillable pdf projects with a cost of $10 million or measures for butterfish. This is the first
versions of OPID Assignment Request more and plans to remove year that the specifications are being set
(Form F 1000.1). Starting January 27, § 195.64(c)(1)(iii) in a future rulemaking. for Atlantic mackerel and butterfish
2012, the Online Data Reporting System
OPID Validation—§§ 191.22(b) and under the provisions of the Mid-Atlantic
(ODES) is used by entities requesting a
195.64(b) Fishery Management Council’s
new OPID. PHMSA is entering the pdf
(Council) Annual Catch Limit and
versions of OPID Assignment Request
On March 27, 2012, operators will be Accountability Measure Omnibus
forms into ODES and will notify
able to complete the validation process Amendment. This action also adjusts
requestors when the OPID has been
online. PHMSA requests that all OPIDs the closure threshold for the commercial
established.
While subject to the pipeline safety issued prior to January 1, 2012, mackerel fishery to 95 percent (from 90
regulations, operators of master meter complete the validation process. As percent), and allows the use of jigging
systems or petroleum gas systems that with OPID Assignment Requests, master gear to target longfin squid if the longfin
serve fewer than 100 customers from a meter and small LPG operators in squid fishery is closed due to the
single source are not required to file existence prior to December 31, 2011, butterfish mortality cap. Finally, this
annual reports (see 49 CFR 191.11(b)). are not required to complete the rule makes minor corrections in existing
There were several thousand master validation process. Based on the regulatory text to clarify the intent of the
meter system operators and several delayed availability of the on-line regulations. These specifications and
hundred small liquefied petroleum gas validation process, PHMSA is extending management measures promote the
(LPG) operators who fell within the utilization and conservation of the
the regulatory deadline for validation
scope of this exception as of December Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish
from June 30, 2012, to September 30,
31, 2011. (MSB) resource.
2012. PHMSA recommends that
While also subject to the requirements DATES: This rule is effective on April 20,
operators submit calendar year 2011
of 49 CFR 191.22, PHMSA previously 2012. Public comments on the interim
annual reports at least five working days
determined that the operators of these final butterfish specifications must be
prior to completing the validation
systems would not be required to obtain received no later than 5 p.m., eastern
process. standard time, on April 20, 2012.
an OPID. Instead, PHMSA agreed to
create OPIDs for these operators based Further details on how to submit ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on the existing data in the agency’s files. reports to PHMSA are available at on the butterfish specifications,
That is currently underway and will be http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov. Questions identified by NOAA–NMFS–2011–0245,
completed by May 1, 2012. should be directed to the Office of by any one of the following methods:
In light of this experience, PHMSA Pipeline Safety operator helpline at • Electronic Submission: Submit all
has decided that master meter and small 202–366–8075. electronic public comments via the
LPG operators established after Issued in Washington, DC, on March 9, Federal e-Rulemaking Portal http://
December 31, 2011, will be required to 2012. www.regulations.gov. To submit
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
obtain an OPID in accordance with 49 comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal,

Jeffrey D. Wiese,
CFR 191.22. On May 1, 2012, PHMSA first click the ‘‘submit a comment’’ icon,
will modify ODES to allow these master Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. then enter NMFS–NOAA–2011–0245 in
meter and small LPG operators to [FR Doc. 2012–6860 Filed 3–20–12; 8:45 am] the keyword search. Locate the
request an OPID. The requirement to BILLING CODE 4910–60–P document you wish to comment on
request an OPID continues to not apply from the resulting list and click on the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:17 Mar 20, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\21MRR1.SGM 21MRR1
Federal Register Volume 77, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18,
2012)
[Notices] [Page 2606]
[Docket ID PHMSA-2012-0004]
Pipeline Safety: Random Drug Testing Rate
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Minimum Annual Percentage Rate for Random Drug Testing.
SUMMARY: PHMSA has determined that the minimum random drug testing rate for covered
employees will remain at 25 percent during calendar year 2012.
DATES: Effective January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Kastanas, Program Manager,

Substance Abuse Prevention Program, PHMSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, telephone
(202) 550-0629 or email stanley.kastanas@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Operators of gas, hazardous liquid, and carbon dioxide

pipelines and operators of liquefied natural gas facilities must select and test a percentage of
covered employees for random drug testing. Pursuant to 49 CFR 199.105(c)(2), (3), and (4), the
PHMSA Administrator's decision on whether to change the minimum annual random drug testing
rate is based on the reported random drug test positive rate for the pipeline industry. The data
considered by the Administrator comes from operators' annual submissions of Management
Information System (MIS) reports required by 49 CFR 199.119(a). If the reported random drug
test positive rate is less than one percent, the Administrator may continue the minimum random
drug testing rate at 25 percent. In 2010, the random drug test positive rate was less than one
percent. Therefore, the minimum random drug testing rate will remain at 25 percent for calendar
year 2012.
On January 19, 2010, PHMSA published an Advisory Bulletin (75 FR 2926) implementing the
annual collection of contractor MIS drug and alcohol testing data. All applicable § 199.119 (drug
testing) and § 199.229 (alcohol testing) MIS reporting operators are responsible for the
submission of all contractor MIS reports to PHMSA, as well as their own, by March 15, 2012.
Contractors with employees in safety-sensitive positions who performed, as defined in § 199.3 of

49 CFR Part 199, covered functions, must submit these reports only through the auspices of each
operator for whom these covered employees performed those covered functions (i.e.,
maintenance, operations or emergency response).
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60117, and 60118; 49 CFR 1.53.
Issued in Washington, DC on January 6, 2012.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2012-740 Filed 1-17-12; 8:45 am]

2011 Advisory Bulletins
Federal Register Volume 76, Number 6 (Monday, January 10, 2011
[Docket No. PHMSA-2010-0381
Pipeline Safety: Establishing Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure or Maximum Operating

Pressure Using Record Evidence, and Integrity Management Risk Identification, Assessment,
Prevention, and Mitigation
ACTION: Notice; issuance of Advisory Bulletin.
SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an Advisory Bulletin to remind operators of gas and hazardous
liquid pipeline facilities of their responsibilities, under Federal integrity management (IM)
regulations, to perform detailed threat and risk analyses that integrate accurate data and
information from their entire pipeline system, especially when calculating Maximum Allowable
Operating Pressure (MAOP) or Maximum Operating Pressure (MOP), and to utilize these risk
analyses in the identification of appropriate assessment methods, and preventive and mitigative
measures.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Mayberry by phone at 202-366-5124 or by

e-mail at alan.mayberry@dot.gov. All materials in this docket may be accessed electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov. General information about the PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety
(OPS) can be obtained by accessing OPS's Internet home page at
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline.
Background
PHMSA's goal is to improve the overall integrity of pipeline systems and reduce risks. To
adequately evaluate risk, it is necessary to identify and evaluate the physical and operational
characteristics of each individual pipeline system. To that end, the Hazardous Liquid and Gas
Transmission Pipeline Integrity Management (IM) Programs were created with the following
objectives:
1
· Ensuring the quality of pipeline integrity in areas with a higher potential for adverse
consequences (high consequence areas or HCAs);
· Promoting a more rigorous and systematic management of pipeline integrity and risk by
operators;
· Maintaining the government's prominent role in the oversight of pipeline operator

integrity plans and programs; and
· Increasing the public's confidence in the safe operation of the nation's pipeline network.
The IM regulations supplement PHMSA's prescriptive safety regulations with requirements that
are intelligent, performance based and process-oriented. One of the fundamental tenets of the IM
program is that pipeline operators must be aware of the physical attributes of their pipeline as
well as the physical environment that it transverses. These programs reflect the recognition that
each pipeline is unique and has its own specific risk profile that is dependent upon the pipelines
attributes, its geographical location, design, operating environment, the commodity being
transported, and many other factors. This information is a vital component in an operator's ability
to identify and evaluate the risks to its pipeline and identify the appropriate assessment tools, set
the schedule for assessments of the integrity of the pipeline segments and identify the need for
additional preventive and mitigative measures such as lowering operating pressures. If this
information is unknown, or unknowable, a more conservative approach to operations is dictated.
An IM program must go beyond simply assessing pipeline segments and repairing defects.
Improving operator IM programs, the analytical processes involved in identifying and responding
to risk, and the application of assessment and development of preventive and mitigative measures
is also a critical objective. In addition, the ability to integrate and analyze threat and integrity
related data from many sources is essential for enhanced safety and proactive integrity
management. However, some operators are not sufficiently aware of their pipeline attributes nor
are they adequately or consistently assessing threats and risks as a part of their IM programs.
Over the past several years, PHMSA inspections and investigations have revealed deficiencies in
individual operators' risk analysis approaches, the integration of data into these risk assessments,
the abilities to adequately support the selection of assessment methods, identification and
implementation of preventive and mitigative measures, and maintenance of up-to-date risk
information and findings about their pipeline segments. In particular, operators' programs fail to
adequately address stress corrosion cracking, seam failure, or internal corrosion in their threat
identification and risk assessments. The actual use of threat and risk information to determine
assessment methods, to evaluate other preventive and mitigative measures, and to use those
measures during periodic evaluation have been found to be deficient. Inspections and
investigations have revealed examples where assessment methods, specific tools, and schedules
were not based on a rigorous assessment of the type of threats posed by the pipeline segment,
including consideration of the age, design, pipe material including seam type, coating, welding
technique, cathodic protection, soil type, surrounding environment, operational history, or other
relevant factors. Finally, inspections and investigations indicate that efforts to collect and
integrate risk information can be inappropriately narrow, lack verification and fail to take into
account relevant risk information and lessons learned from other parts of their system.
In recent pipeline accident investigations, NTSB and PHMSA have discovered indications that
operator oversight of IM programs has been lacking and thereby failed to detect flaws and
2
deficiencies in their programs. The level of self-evaluation and oversight currently being
exercised by some pipeline operators is not uniformly applied. The NTSB is also concerned that
pipeline operators throughout the United States may have discrepancies in their records that could
potentially compromise the safe operation of their pipelines. NTSB has recommended that
operators diligently and objectively scrutinize the effectiveness of their programs, identify areas
for improvement, and implement corrective measures.
On January 3, 2011, NTSB recommended that PHMSA inform the pipeline industry of the
circumstances leading up to and the consequences of the September 9, 2010, pipeline rupture in
San Bruno, California, to ensure that both PHMSA and NTSB findings and recommendations
with respect to the verification of records used to establish or adjust MAOP or MOP are
expeditiously incorporated into the IM programs for pipeline operators. The pipeline rupture in
San Bruno, CA involved a 30-inch-diameter natural gas transmission pipeline owned and
operated by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). The rupture occurred in a residential
area killing eight people, injuring many more, and causing substantial property damage. The
rupture created a crater about 72 feet long by 26 feet wide. A ruptured pipe segment about 28 feet
long was found about 100 feet away from the crater. The resulting fire destroyed 37 homes and
damaged 18. NTSB's preliminary findings indicate that the pipeline operator did not have an
accurate basis for the MAOP calculation.
There are several methods available for establishing MAOP or MOP. A hydrostatic pressure test
that stresses the pipe to a designated percent of the desired MAOP or MOP, without failure, is
generally the most effective method. Hydrostatic testing requirements and restrictions for natural
gas pipelines are specified in Title 49 CFR Part 192, Subpart J. Similar requirements for
hazardous liquid pipelines are found in 49 CFR Part 195, Subpart E. Although hydrostatic testing
is recognized to be the most direct and effective methodology for validating a MAOP or MOP, its
implementation requires that operating lines be shut down, which may adversely affect customers
dependent on the natural gas supplied by the pipeline, particularly if the pipe fails during the test,
which could necessitate a protracted shutdown. Consequently, operators prefer to use available
design, construction, inspection, testing, and other related records to calculate the valid MAOP or
MOP. However, this method is susceptible to error if pipeline records are inaccurate. With
respect to the portion of the pipeline that failed in the September 9, 2010, San Bruno incident,
PG&E used available design, construction, inspection, testing, and other related records to
calculate the MAOP. The NTSB's examination of the ruptured pipe segment and review of PG&E
records revealed that although the as-built drawings and alignment sheets mark the pipe as
seamless API 5L Grade X42 pipe, the pipeline in the area of the rupture was constructed with
longitudinal seam-welded pipe. The ruptured pipe segment was constructed of five sections of
pipe, some of which were short pieces measuring about four feet long, containing different
longitudinal seam welds of various types, including single- and double-sided welds.
Consequently, the short pieces of pipe of unknown specifications in the ruptured pipe segment
may not have been as strong as the seamless API 5L Grade X42 steel pipe listed in PG&E's
records. PG&E's records also identify Consolidated Western Steel Corporation as the
manufacturer of the accident segment of Line 132. However, after physical inspection of the
ruptured section, investigators were unable to confirm the manufacturing source of some of the
pieces of ruptured pipe.
Integrity Management Regulatory Provisions
For hazardous liquid pipelines, Sec. 195.452 establishes requirements for IM programs in HCAs.
Section 195.452(b)(1) requires that each operator of a hazardous liquid pipeline "develop a
3
written IM program that addresses the risks on each segment of pipeline." Section 195.452(e)
defines the minimum list of risk factors that must be included in the risk assessments used to
schedule segment assessments. Appendix C provides additional guidance on these risk factors.
Section 195.452(f) defines the required elements of an IM program. These elements include an
analysis that integrates all available information about the integrity of the entire pipeline and the
consequences of a failure, including data gathered during previous integrity assessments and data
gathered in conjunction with other maintenance inspections and investigations. These elements
also include an identification of additional preventive and mitigative measures to protect the
HCAs (Sec. 195.452(i)), including conducting a risk analysis in which an operator must evaluate
the likelihood of a pipeline release and how it could affect the HCAs. Preventive and mitigative
measures to be evaluated based on risk factors include, but are not limited to, leak detection
system modifications and installation of additional Emergency Flow Restricting Devices.
For natural gas pipelines, Subpart O of 49 CFR Part 192 establishes the requirements for IM
programs in HCAs. Section 192.911(c) requires that IM programs include "[a]n identification of
threats to each covered pipeline segment, which must include data integration and a risk
assessment." This section further requires "[a]n operator must use the threat identification and
risk assessment to prioritize covered segments for assessment (Sec. 192.917) and to evaluate the
merits of additional preventive and mitigative measures (Sec. 192.935) for each covered
segment." Section 192.917(b) requires an operator to integrate existing data and information on
the entire pipeline that could be relevant to a covered segment. In performing this data gathering
and integration, an operator must follow the requirements in ASME/ANSI B31.8S, section 4. At a
minimum, an operator must gather and evaluate the set of data specified in Appendix A to
ASME/ANSI B31.8S, and consider both on the covered segment and similar non-covered
segments, past incident history, corrosion control records, continuing surveillance records,
patrolling records, maintenance history, internal inspection records, operating stress levels, past
pressure test information, soil characteristics, and all other conditions specific to each pipeline.
Section 192.917(c) states that an operator must conduct a risk assessment that follows
ASME/ANSI B31.8S, section 5, and considers the identified threats for each covered segment.
An operator must use the risk assessment to prioritize the covered segments for the baseline and
periodic reassessments, and to determine what additional preventive and mitigative measures are
needed for the covered segment. Sections 192.919 and 192.921(a) further require that the operator
explain why the particular assessment method for each segment was selected to address the
identified threats to each covered segment. Specifically, Sec. 192.921(a) requires the operator to
select the method or methods best suited to address the identified threats to the covered segment
(pipeline), which include internal inspection tool[s], pressure test, direct assessment, or other
technology that an operator demonstrates can provide an equivalent understanding of the
condition of the pipeline. More than one assessment method may be required to address all the
threats to the covered pipeline segment. Section 192.935 requires that an operator take additional
measures beyond those already required by Part 192 to prevent a pipeline failure and to mitigate
the consequences of a pipeline failure in a HCA. An operator must base the additional measures
on the threats the operator has identified to each pipeline segment. This section requires that an
operator conduct, in accordance with one of the risk assessment approaches in ASME/ANSI
B31.8S, section 5, a risk analysis of its pipeline to identify additional measures to protect the
HCA and enhance public safety.
To: Owners and Operators of Hazardous Liquid and Gas Pipeline Systems.
4
Subject: Establishing Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure or Maximum Operating Pressure
Using Record Evidence, and Integrity Management Risk Identification, Assessment, Prevention,
and Mitigation.
Advisory: To further enhance the Department's safety efforts and implement the NTSB's January
3, 2011, recommendation to PHMSA [P-10-1], PHMSA is issuing this Advisory Bulletin
concerning establishing MAOP and MOP using record evidence and integrity management; threat
and risk identification; risk assessment; risk information collection, accuracy and integration, and
identification and implementation of preventive and mitigative measures.
I. Establishing MAOP or MOP Using Record Evidence
As PHMSA and NTSB recommended, operators relying on the review of design, construction,
inspection, testing and other related data to calculate MAOP or MOP must assure that the records
used are reliable. An operator must diligently search, review and scrutinize documents and
records, including but not limited to, all as-built drawings, alignment sheets, and specifications,
and all design, construction, inspection, testing, maintenance, manufacturer, and other related
records. These records shall be traceable, verifiable, and complete. If such a document and
records search, review, and verification cannot be satisfactorily completed, the operator cannot
rely on this method for calculating MAOP or MOP. Copies of the recommendations issued by
NTSB to PHMSA, PG&E, and the California Public Utilities Commission, are available in the
public docket and at PHMSA's Web site: http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/regs/ntsb.
II. Performing Risk Identification, Assessment, Data Accuracy, Prevention, and Mitigation
Pipeline operators are reminded of their responsibilities to identify pipeline integrity threats,
perform rigorous risk analyses, integrate information, and identify, evaluate, and implement
preventive and mitigative measures as required by the Federal pipeline safety regulations.
Operators should thoroughly review their current IM programs and make any changes necessary
to become fully compliant with the Federal pipeline safety regulations. Future, PHMSA
inspections will place emphasis on the areas noted in this Advisory Bulletin.
Operators are also advised that PHMSA and its State partners intend to sponsor a public
workshop on threat and risk identification, risk assessment, risk information collection and
integration, and identification of preventive and mitigative measures. The purpose of the
workshop will be to expand the industry's knowledge base about effective IM programs. At this
workshop, PHMSA will discuss the progress it has seen and the challenges remaining. Operators
with demonstrably effective programs will be invited to share information. Public participation
will be encouraged.
A. Risk and Threat Identification
PHMSA emphasizes the need for operators to be fully cognizant of the physical and operational
characteristics of their systems, understand the threats to their systems, and the risks posed by
their systems. Each operator is ultimately responsible for identifying all risk factors and cannot
rely solely on the factors in Sec. 195.452(e) and Appendix C of Part 195 or Sec. 192.917. Any
operator of a hazardous liquid or gas transmission pipeline that is not fully cognizant of the
location, pipe material and seam type, coating, cathodic protection history, repair history,
previous pressure testing, or operational pressure history, and other assessment information,
5
incident data, soil type and environment, operational history, or other key risk factors of a
pipeline operating at or above 30% SMYS should (1) institute an aggressive program as soon as
possible to obtain this information, (2) assess the risks, and (3) take the proper mitigative
measures based upon the operator's IM program risk findings. In addition, if these operators do
not have verified information on key risk factors, an immediate and interim mitigation measure
that should be strongly considered is a pressure reduction to 80 percent of the operating pressure
for the previous month, hydro testing the pipeline or creating a remediation program to identify
threat risks. Operators of transmission pipelines operating below 30% SMYS should also conduct
an integrity threat and risk review of these pipelines to ensure safety in HCAs. PHMSA will
require an operator that has not adequately identified all threats to take mitigative measures.
B. Risk Assessment
Operators are advised to re-examine the basis for their IM assessment, as well as their MAOP or
MOP calculations and documentation to meet Federal regulations in 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195.
Operators must consider all significant risk factors in their risk assessments; conduct risk
assessments capable of supporting identification of preventive and mitigative measures; integrate
into their threat and risk assessments all relevant risk information from prior integrity
assessments, inspections, investigations, and incidents with design, construction, operational and
maintenance data; to critically analyze the integrated data and incorporate the analysis into their
risk assessments and integrity-related decision making; update and maintain their risk
information; and to ensure that the risk information is made available throughout the organization
in a form that can effectively support decisions on integrity assessment methods, tools, process
and procedure changes, and schedule during the required periodic evaluations of pipeline
integrity. PHMSA and its State partners intend to verify that operators have taken these actions
during the course of future pipeline safety inspections and investigations.
C. Data Accuracy
Operators must review and scrutinize pipeline infrastructure documents and records, including
but not limited to, all as-built drawings, alignment sheets, specifications, and all design,
construction, inspection, testing, material manufacturer, operational maintenance data, and other
related records, to ensure company records accurately reflect the pipeline's physical and
operational characteristics. These records should be traceable, verifiable, and complete to meet
Sec. Sec. 192.619 and 195.302. Incomplete or partial records are not an adequate basis for
establishing MAOP or MOP using this method. If such a document and records search, review,
and verification cannot be satisfactorily completed, the operator may need to conduct other
activities such as in-situ examination, pressure testing, and nondestructive testing or otherwise
verify the characteristics of the pipeline when identifying and assessing threats or risks.
D. Risk Mitigation and Prevention
PHMSA advises operators to implement a robust IM process that includes methods best suited to
address the threats and risks identified (Sec. 192.921(a) and Sec. 195.452(f)). Operators must use
post assessment and continuing evaluation processes to evaluate program effectiveness in
identifying threats, addressing threat preventative and mitigative measures, and providing internal
IM program feedback of assessment findings so the assessment process can be updated based
upon threat findings.
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 4, 2011.
6
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
[FR Doc. 2011-208 Filed 1-7-11; 8:45 am]
Federal Register Volume 76, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 9, 2011)
Pipeline Safety: Dangers of Abnormal Snow and Ice Build-Up on Gas Distribution Systems
ACTION: Notice; issuance of advisory bulletin.
SUMMARY: This advisory bulletin advises owners and operators of petroleum gas and natural
gas facilities of the need to take the appropriate steps to prevent damage to pipeline facilities from
accumulated snow or ice. Past events on natural gas distribution system facilities appear to have
been related to either the stress of snow and ice or the malfunction of pressure control equipment
due to ice blockage of pressure control equipment vents. This advisory reminds owners and
operators of the need to take precautionary actions to prevent adverse events.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Daugherty, Deputy Associate

Administrator for Policy and Programs at 202-366-4595 or by e-mail at
Linda.Daugherty@dot.gov.
I. Background
The accumulation of snow and ice increases the potential for damage to meters and regulators and
other aboveground pipeline facilities and components. Incidents have occurred in past winters on
natural gas distribution system facilities that appear to have been related to either the stress of
snow and ice or malfunction of pressure control equipment due to ice blockage of pressure
control equipment vents. Exposed piping at metering and pressure regulating stations, at service
regulators, and at propane tanks, are at greatest risk. Damage may result from the stresses
7
imposed by the additional loading of the snow or ice. Damage to facilities may also result from
the impact of snow or ice falling from roofs, ice forming in or on regulators preventing their
proper operation, or shoveling snow from roofs to protect dwellings from abnormal snow
accumulation.
To: Owners and Operators of Petroleum Gas and Natural Gas Facilities in Areas Subject to
Heavy Snowfall or Abnormally Icy Weather.
Subject: Dangers of Abnormal Snow and Ice Build-up on Gas Distribution Systems.
Purpose: To remind owners and operators of the need to (1) monitor the potential impact of
excessive snow and ice on these facilities; and (2) inform the public about possible hazards from
snow and ice accumulation on regulators and other pipeline facilities.
Advisory: PHMSA is advising operators of petroleum gas and natural gas pipeline facilities,
regardless of whether those facilities are regulated by PHMSA or state agencies, to consider the
following steps to address the safety risks from accumulated snow and ice on pipeline facilities:
1. Notify customers and other entities of the need for caution associated with excessive
accumulation and removal of snow and ice. Notice should include the need to clear snow and ice
from exhaust and combustion air vents for gas appliances to:
(a) Prevent accumulation of carbon monoxide in buildings; or
(b) Prevent operational problems for the combustion equipment.
2. Pay attention to snow and ice related situations that may cause operational problems for
pressure control and other equipment.
3. Monitor the accumulation of moisture in equipment and snow or ice blocking regulator or
relief valve vents which could prevent regulators and relief valves from functioning properly.
4. The piping on service regulator sets is susceptible to damage that could result in failure if
caution is not exercised in cleaning snow from around the equipment. Where possible, use a
broom instead of a shovel to clear snow off regulators, meters, associated piping, propane tanks,
tubing, gauges or other propane system appurtenances.
5. Remind the public to contact the gas company or designated emergency response officials if
there is an odor of gas present or if gas appliances are not functioning properly. Also, remind the
public that they should leave their residence immediately if they detect a gas or propane odor and
report the odor to their gas company, propane operator or designated emergency response
officials.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. chapter 601; 49 CFR 1.53.
Issued in Washington, DC, on February 3, 2011.
8
Linda Daugherty,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy and Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-2837 Filed 2-8-11; 8:45 am]
Advisory Bulletin (ADB-11-03
Federal Register Volume 76, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2011)
[Rules and Regulations] [Pages 28326-28328]
49 CFR 191, 192, 193, and 195
Pipeline Safety: National Pipeline Mapping System Data Submissions and Submission Dates for
Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems and Liquefied Natural Gas Annual Reports
ACTION: Issuance of advisory bulletin.
SUMMARY: This document advises owners and operators of gas transmission and gathering
systems and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facilities that they have until August 15, 2011, to
submit their Calendar Year 2010 Annual Reports. This document also provides guidance for
Calendar Year 2010 National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS) submissions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Little, 202-366-4569 or by e- mail at

Roger.Little@dot.gov.
I. Background
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) published a final rule on
November 26, 2010, under Docket No. PHMSA 2008-0291 [75 FR 72878], titled: "Pipeline
Safety: Updates to Pipeline and Liquefied Natural Gas Reporting Requirements" (One Rule). This
rulemaking revised the Pipeline Safety Regulations (49 CFR part 190- 199) to improve the
reliability and utility of data collections from operators of natural gas pipelines, hazardous liquid
pipelines, and LNG facilities. As a result of the rulemaking, several annual and incident report
9
forms were created while other forms were revised. Included among these forms, PHMSA
created a new Annual Report for LNG facilities (LNG Annual Report; PHMSA F-7100.3-1) and
revised the Annual Report for Natural or Other Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems (Gas
Transmission and Gathering Annual Report; PHMSA F-7100.2-1). The One Rule revised Sec.
191.17 to specify that these reports should be submitted no later than March 15 for the preceding
year, except for Calendar Year 2010, where reports should be submitted by June 15, 2011. This
delayed reporting date for Calendar Year 2010 was added to allow companies time to update their
information for submission according to the revised form.
After the One Rule was published, PHMSA received a petition from the American Gas
Association (AGA) on December 22, 2010, asking for reconsideration of the information
collected on the LNG Annual Report form. PHMSA reviewed the petition and has revised the
form based on AGA's recommendation. PHMSA is using this document to announce that we are
extending the reporting date for the LNG Annual Report form to August 15, 2011, to allow
further time to prepare the electronic system PHMSA will use to collect the information. Next
year, the filing date will go back to the March 15 date specified in the regulation.
In addition, PHMSA determined that further clarifications were needed to Parts K and L on the
revised Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems annual report, specifically to correct boundaries
for Specified Minimum Yield Strength, and to clarify certain sections of Part L that were not
applicable to the regulated community at present. Accordingly, PHMSA has blacked out those
sections of the form to clarify the intent of the information collection. In addition, PHMSA is
extending the Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems report filing deadline from the stated
June 15, 2011, to August 15, 2011, for PHMSA to prepare the electronic system it will be using
to collect the information. This will also align the filing date with the new LNG Annual Report.
Next year, the filing date of the Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems report will go back to
the March 15 date specified in the regulation. The forms are available at the following URL:
http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/library/forms.
PHMSA has also received a number of questions regarding NPMS submissions. The NPMS
consists of geospatial data, attribute data, public contact information, and metadata pertaining to
the interstate and intrastate hazardous liquid trunklines and hazardous liquid low- stress lines as
well as gas transmission pipelines, LNG plants, and hazardous liquid breakout tanks regulated by
PHMSA. Most operators submit their NPMS data to PHMSA at the same time they file their
annual report. For example, gas transmission operators who file their annual report on the regular
filing date of March 15 for the previous calendar year would also submit their NPMS data on
March 15 for the previous calendar year, reflecting assets as of December 31, 2010. Although
PHMSA is extending the filing date for annual report submissions, operators are encouraged to
file their NPMS data at their regularly scheduled times.
For clarification purposes, PHMSA is providing the following table which explains the reporting
dates for annual reporting:
Normalsubmission date(49 CFR cite) Calendar year2010 submission(49 CFR cite)

Calendar year2010 extendedsubmission date
Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems Annual Report (PHMSA–F 7100.2–1). March 15(§
191.15(a)) June 15, 2011(§ 191.15(a)) Aug. 15, 2011.
LNG Annual Report (PHMSA–F 7100.3–1). March 15(§ 191.15(b)) June 15, 2011(§
191.15(b)) Aug. 15, 2011.
10
Hazardous Liquid Annual Report(PHMSA–F 7000–1.1). June 15 (§ 195.49) Aug. 15,
2011(§ 195.49)
To: Owners and Operators of Gas Transmission and Gathering Pipeline Facilities, LNG Facilities,
and Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Facilities.
Subject: Submission Dates and Minor Form Changes for Calendar Year 2010 Gas Transmission
and Gathering Systems Annual Reports, LNG Annual Reports; and NPMS Data submissions.
Advisory: This document advises owners and operators of gas and LNG pipeline facilities that
PHMSA is extending the reporting date for Calendar Year 2010 Gas Transmission and Gathering
Systems Annual Reports (PHMSA F-7100.2-1) and LNG Annual Reports (PHMSA F-7100.3-1)
to August 15, 2011. These forms were previously scheduled for submission on June 15, 2011.
Any questions regarding these submissions may be directed to the Office of Pipeline Safety
operator helpline at 202-366- 8075.
In addition, operators subject to the NPMS statutory mandate are encouraged to file their annual
data submissions based on their regularly scheduled dates. For example, hazardous liquid
operators who normally submit their NPMS data on June 15 when they file their annual report are
encouraged to file their 2010 NPMS data submission on June 15, reflecting assets as of December
31, 2010, even though the Hazardous Liquid Annual report is not required for submission until
August 15, 2011. Any questions regarding NPMS submissions can be directed to Amy Nelson at
202-493-0591.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 10, 2011.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-11954 Filed 5-16-11; 8:45 am]
Federal Register Volume 76, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2011)
11
Pipeline Safety: Potential for Damage to Pipeline Facilities Caused by Flooding
SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing this advisory bulletin to all owners and operators of gas and
hazardous liquid pipelines to communicate the potential for damage to pipeline facilities caused
by severe flooding. This advisory includes actions that operators should consider taking to ensure
the integrity of pipelines in case of flooding.
ADDRESSES: This document can be viewed on the Office of Pipeline Safety home page at:
http://ops.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Operators of pipelines subject to regulation by

PHMSA should contact the appropriate PHMSA Regional Office. The PHMSA Regional Offices
and their contact information are as follows:
· Eastern Region: Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland,

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Virginia, and West Virginia, call 609-989-2171.
· Southern Region: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina,

Puerto Rico, South Carolina, and Tennessee, call 404-832-1140.
· Central Region: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,

Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin, call 816-329-3800.
· Southwest Region: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas, call 713-
272-2859.
· Western Region: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana,

Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming, call 720-963-3160.
Intrastate pipeline operators should contact the appropriate State pipeline safety authority. A list
of State pipeline safety authorities is provided at:
http://www.napsr.org/managers/napsr_state_program_managers2.htm.
I. Background
Section 192.613(a) of the Pipeline Safety Regulations (49 CFR parts 190-199) states that “[e]ach
operator shall have a procedure for continuing surveillance of its facilities to determine and take
appropriate action concerning changes in class location, failures, leakage history, corrosion,
12
substantial changes in cathodic protection requirements, and other unusual operating and
maintenance conditions.” Section 192.613(b) further states that “[i]f a segment of pipeline is
determined to be in unsatisfactory condition but no immediate hazard exists, the operator shall
initiate a program to recondition or phase out the segment involved, or, if the segment cannot be
reconditioned or phased out, reduce the maximum allowable operating pressure in accordance
with Sec. 192.619 (a) and (b).”
Likewise, Sec. 195.401(b)(1) of the Pipeline Safety Regulations states that “[w]henever an
operator discovers any condition that could adversely affect the safe operation of its pipeline
system, it must correct the condition within a reasonable time. However, if the condition is of
such a nature that it presents an immediate hazard to persons or property, the operator may not
operate the affected part of the system until it has corrected the unsafe condition.” Section
195.401(b)(2) further states that “[w]hen an operator discovers a condition on a pipeline covered
under [the integrity management requirements in] Sec. 195.452, the operator must correct the
condition as prescribed in Sec. 195.452(h).”
Severe flooding is the kind of unusual operating condition that can adversely affect the safe
operation of a pipeline and require corrective action under Sec. Sec. 192.613(a) and 195.401(b).
In October 1994, major flooding along the San Jacinto River near Houston, Texas, resulted in
eight pipeline failures and compromised the integrity of several other pipelines. Similar flooding
has occurred along the Yellowstone River in the past few months. While the cause of the accident
is still under investigation, ExxonMobil Pipeline Company experienced a pipeline failure near
Laurel, Montana, on July 1, 2011, resulting in the release of crude oil into the Yellowstone River.
Severe flooding and other conditions that can adversely affect the safe operation of a pipeline
may also trigger the reporting requirements in Part 191 and Part 195 or applicable state reporting
requirements. PHMSA requires operators to submit telephonic and written reports when natural
gas or hazardous liquid releases occur that exceed certain threshold requirements. PHMSA also
requires operators to submit reports of safety-related conditions involving potentially unsafe
conditions on natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines (Sec. Sec. 191.23 and 195.55).
To: Owners and operators of gas and hazardous liquid pipeline systems.
Subject: Potential for damage to pipeline facilities caused by severe flooding.
Advisory: Severe flooding can adversely affect the safe operation of a pipeline. Operators need to
direct their resources in a manner that will enable them to determine the potential effects of
flooding on their pipeline systems. Operators are urged to take the following actions to prevent
and mitigate damage to pipeline facilities and ensure public and environmental safety in areas
affected by flooding:
1. Evaluate the accessibility of pipeline facilities that may be in jeopardy, such as valve settings,
which are needed to isolate water crossings or other sections of a pipeline.
2. Extend regulator vents and relief stacks above the level of anticipated flooding, as appropriate.
13
3. Coordinate with emergency and spill responders on pipeline location and condition. Provide
maps and other relevant information to such responders.
4. Coordinate with other pipeline operators in the flood area and establish emergency response
centers to act as a liaison for pipeline problems and solutions.
5. Deploy personnel so that they will be in position to take emergency actions, such as shut down,
isolation, or containment.
6. Determine if facilities that are normally above ground (e.g., valves, regulators, relief sets, etc.)
have become submerged and are in danger of being struck by vessels or debris; if possible, such
facilities should be marked with an appropriate buoy with Coast Guard approval.
7. Perform frequent patrols, including appropriate overflights, to evaluate right-of-way conditions

at water crossings during flooding and after waters subside. Determine if flooding has exposed or
undermined pipelines as a result of new river channels cut by the flooding or by erosion or
scouring.
8. Perform surveys to determine the depth of cover over pipelines and the condition of any
exposed pipelines, such as those crossing scour holes. Where appropriate, surveys of underwater
pipe should include the use of visual inspection by divers or instrumented detection. Information
gathered by these surveys should be shared with affected landowners. Agricultural agencies may
help to inform farmers of the potential hazard from reduced cover over pipelines.
9. Ensure that line markers are still in place or replaced in a timely manner. Notify contractors,
highway departments, and others involved in post-flood restoration activities of the presence of
pipelines and the risks posed by reduced cover.
If a pipeline has suffered damage, is shut-in, or is being operated at a reduced pressure as a

precautionary measure as a result of flooding, the operator should advise the appropriate PHMSA
Regional Office or State pipeline safety authority before returning the line to service, increasing
its operating pressure, or otherwise changing its operating status. PHMSA or the State will review
all available information and advise the operator, on a case-by-case basis, whether and to what
extent a line can safely be returned to full service.
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 22, 2011.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
[FR Doc. 2011-19029 Filed 7-26-11; 8:45 am]
Federal Register Volume 76, Number 170 (Thursday, September 1, 2011)
14
Notices [Pages 54531-54532]
Pipeline Safety: Potential for Damage to Pipeline Facilities Caused by the Passage of Hurricanes
SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing this advisory bulletin to remind owners and operators of gas and
hazardous liquid pipelines of the potential for damage to pipeline facilities caused by the passage
of Hurricanes.
ADDRESSES: This document can be viewed on the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) home page
at: http://ops.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Operators of pipelines subject to regulation by

PHMSA should contact the appropriate PHMSA Regional Office. The PHMSA Regional Offices
and their contact information are as follows:
Eastern Region: Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,

New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and
West Virginia, call 609-989-2171.
Southern Region: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto
Rico, South Carolina, and Tennessee, call 404-832-1140.
Central Region: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North
Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin, call 816-329-3800.
Southwest Region: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas, call 713-272-2859.
Western Region: Alaska,, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada,
Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming, call 720-963-3160.
Intrastate pipeline operators should contact the appropriate State pipeline safety authority. A list
of State pipeline safety authorities is provided at:
http://www.napsr.org/managers/napsr_state_program_managers2.htm.
For general information about this notice contact John Hess, Director for Emergency Support and
Security, 202-366-4595 or by e-mail at PHMSA.OPA90@dot.gov.
15
I. Background
The purpose of this advisory bulletin is to remind all owners and operators of gas and hazardous
liquid pipelines, particularly those with facilities located in offshore and inland areas, about the
serious safety-related issues that can result from the passage of hurricanes. That includes the
potential for damage to offshore platforms and pipelines and onshore pumping stations,
compressor stations, and terminals.
Operators of gas and hazardous liquid pipelines have a general obligation to identify any
conditions that can adversely affect the operation of their pipelines and to take appropriate
corrective measures upon discovering such conditions. Specifically, Sec. 192.613 of the gas
pipeline safety regulations states that “[e]ach operator shall have a procedure for continuing
surveillance of its facilities to determine and take appropriate action concerning * * * unusual
operating and maintenance conditions,” and that “[i]f a segment of pipeline is determined to be in
unsatisfactory condition but no immediate hazard exists, the operator shall initiate a program to
recondition or phase out the segment involved, or, if the segment cannot be reconditioned or
phased out, reduce the maximum allowable operating pressure in accordance with Sec.
192.619(a) and (b).” Section 195.401(b)(1) of the hazardous liquid pipeline safety regulations
states that “[w]henever an operator discovers any condition that could adversely affect the safe
operation of its pipeline system, it must correct the condition within a reasonable time. However,
if the condition is of such a nature that it presents an immediate hazard to persons or property, the
operator may not operate the affected part of the system until it has corrected the unsafe
condition.” Section 195.401(b)(2) further states that “[w]hen an operator discovers a condition on
a pipeline covered under [the integrity management requirements in] Sec. 195.452, the operator
must correct the condition as prescribed in Sec. 195.452(h).”
Operators of shallow-water gas and hazardous liquid pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico and its inlets
have a specific obligation to “prepare and follow a procedure to identify [their] pipelines * * *
that are at risk of being an exposed underwater pipeline or a hazard to navigation * * * [and to]
conduct appropriate underwater inspections * * * [of those pipelines] based on the identified
risk[;]” and upon discovering that “its pipeline is an exposed underwater pipeline or poses a
hazard to navigation,” to promptly report the location of that pipeline to the National Response
Center, to mark its location, and to ensure its reburial within a specified time. 49 CFR 192.612,
195.413.
Hurricanes can adversely affect the operation of a pipeline and require corrective action under
Sec. Sec. 192.613 and 195.401. Hurricanes also increase the risk of underwater pipelines in the
Gulf of Mexico and its inlets becoming exposed or constituting a hazard to navigation under Sec.
Sec. 192.612 and 195.413. The concentration of U.S. oil and gas production, processing, and
transportation facilities in the Gulf of Mexico and onshore Gulf Coast means that a significant
percentage of domestic oil and gas production and processing is prone to disruption by
hurricanes.
In 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused significant damage to the oil and gas production
structures. The onshore damage caused a significant impact in the ability of the oil and gas
industry to respond due to the lack of resources, personnel, and infrastructure, as well as
significant damage to onshore processing facilities and power supplies. There were significant
competing resource needs with the impacts caused by the devastation of New Orleans and
16
western Louisiana/ eastern Texas shore communities that normally provide the services and
supplies for the industry.
To: Owners and operators of gas and hazardous liquid pipeline systems.
Subject: Potential for damage to pipeline facilities caused by hurricanes.
Advisory: All owners and operators of gas and hazardous liquid pipelines are reminded that
pipeline safety problems can occur by the passage of hurricanes. Pipeline operators are urged to
take the following actions to ensure pipeline safety:
1. Identify persons who normally engage in shallow-water commercial fishing, shrimping, and
other marine vessel operations and caution them that underwater offshore pipelines may be
exposed or constitute a hazard to navigation. Marine vessels operating in water depths
comparable to a vessel's draft or when operating bottom dragging equipment can be damaged and
their crews endangered by an encounter with an underwater pipeline.
2. Identify and caution marine vessel operators in offshore shipping lanes and other offshore
areas that deploying fishing nets or anchors and conducting dredging operations may damage
underwater pipelines, their vessels, and endanger their crews.
3. If operators should need to bring offshore and inland transmission facilities back online, check
for structural damage to piping, valves, emergency shutdown systems, risers and supporting
systems. Aerial inspections of pipeline routes should be conducted to check for leaks in the
transmission systems. In areas where floating and jack-up rigs have moved and their path could
have been over the pipelines, review possible routes and check for sub-sea pipeline damage
where required.
4. Operators should take action to minimize and mitigate damages caused by flooding to gas
distribution systems including the prevention of overpressure of low pressure and high pressure
distribution systems.
PHMSA would appreciate receiving information about any damage to pipeline facilities caused
by hurricanes. The Federal pipeline safety regulations require that operators report certain
incidents and accidents to PHMSA by specific methods. Damage not reported by these methods
may be reported to John Hess, Director for Emergency Support and Security, 202-366-4595 or by
e-mail at PHMSA.OPA90@dot.gov.
Chapter 601; 49 CFR 1.53.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 26, 2011.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-22343 Filed 8-31-11; 8:45 am]

17
11/3/2011
Rural Onshore Hazardous

Liquid Gathering Lines and
Low-Stress Lines
Increasing the Maximum

for Gas Transmission Pipelines
New Rules
49 CFR 195 Hazardous Liquids
• Protecting Unusually Sensitive Areas From

Rural Onshore Hazardous Liquid Gathering
Lines and Low-Stress Lines
• PIPES 2006 required PHMSA to issue
regulations for low-stress lines
• Federal Register: June 3, 2008 (Volume 73,
Number 107) 73 FR 31634
• Effective Date: July 3, 2008
1
11/3/2011
Rule Summary
• Extends regulations to cover

– Rural onshore gathering
– Low-stress pipelines
• Defines regulated rural gathering and compliance
requirements
• Reduces exceptions for low-stress pipelines,
requires compliance with all of 49 CFR 195
• Adds reporting requirements
• Goal: Protect “unusually sensitive areas” – USAs
Code Sections
• 195.1 – identifies additional pipelines subject to

regulation
• 195.11 – new section defining regulated rural
gathering lines
• 195.12 – new section defining which low-stress
lines are subject to Part 195
• 195.48 – new section defining pipelines subject to
reporting requirements
• 195.452 – changes address for reports and
authorizes internet reporting
2
11/3/2011
§ 195.11 What is a regulated rural gathering

line and what requirements apply?
• Added, Final Rule - Federal Register: June

3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 107)
• Each operator of a regulated rural gathering
line, as defined in paragraph (a) of this
section, must comply with the safety
requirements described in paragraph (b) of
this section.
Regulated Rural Gathering Line

• (a) …means an onshore gathering line in a rural area that meets all of
the following criteria-
• (1) Has a nominal diameter from 6\5/8\ inches (168 mm) to 8\5/8\
inches (219.1 mm);
• (2) Is located in or within one-quarter mile (.40 km) of an unusually
sensitive area as defined in § 195.6; and
• (3) Operates at a maximum pressure established under § 195.406
corresponding to--
– (i) A stress level greater than 20-percent of the specified minimum yield
strength of the line pipe; or
– (ii) If the stress level is unknown or the pipeline is not constructed with
steel pipe, a pressure of more than 125 psi (861 kPa) gage.
3
11/3/2011
Safety Requirements
• Identify segments by April 3, 2009

• After July 3, 2009, design, install, construct,
inspect, test according to this part
• Reporting – January 3, 2009
• MOP determination, 195.406 – July 3, 2009
• Line markers, 195.410– July 3, 2009
Safety Requirements
• Public education, 195.440 – Jan 3, 2010

• Damage Prevention– July 3, 2009
• Corrosion control, Subpart H– July 3, 2011
• Monitor for internal corrosion– July 3, 2009
• Operator qualification– July 3, 2009, describe
processes
• If new USA, then must comply with safety
requirements within 6 months
• Keep records
4
11/3/2011
§ 195.12 What requirements apply to

low-stress pipelines in rural areas?
• Added, Final Rule - Federal Register: June 3, 2008

(Volume 73, Number 107)
• (a) General. This section does not apply to a rural
low-stress pipeline regulated under this part as a
low-stress pipeline that crosses a waterway
currently used for commercial navigation. An
operator of a rural low-stress pipeline meeting the
following criteria must comply with the safety
requirements described in paragraph (b) of this
section. The pipeline:
Regulation of Low Stress

Pipelines – Phase Two
• May 5, 2011, Amendment 195-96.
• Effective Date: October 1, 2011.
• SUMMARY: PHMSA is amending its pipeline
safety regulations to apply safety regulation to
rural low-stress hazardous liquid pipelines that
were not covered previously by safety regulations.
This change complies with a mandate in the
Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and
Safety Act of 2006 (PIPES Act).
5
11/3/2011
Regulation of Low Stress

Pipelines
• Mandated by PIPES 2006.
• Phase One, June 2008, covered large
diameter pipelines.
• PHMSA added reporting for all low-stress
pipelines and conducted surveys to
determine mileages and sizes.
• Phase Two amended 195.1, .12 and .48.

• (a) Covered pipelines
– HVL pipelines
– Pipelines crossing navigable waterways
– Any pipeline, any diameter, any pressure, except
exempt gathering
– Gathering
• Non-rural
• Regulated rural under 195.11
• Pipelines in inlets of Gulf of Mexico
• Breakout tanks
6
11/3/2011

• (b) Excepted
– Hazardous liquid as a gas
– Hazardous liquid through gravity pipeline
– Low stress subject to Coast Guard
– Outside plant lines < 1 mile in length
– Rural gathering that is not regulated
– Some offshore pipelines
– In-plant piping
– Non-pipeline modes of transportation
– Some CO2

• Low-stress pipeline categories
– Category 1
• diameter of 8\5/8\ inches or more
• Within 1/2 mile of a USA
• Stress <= 20% SMYS or less than 125 psi
– Category 2
• Diameter of less than 8\5/8\ inches
• Within 1/2 mile of a USA
7
11/3/2011

– Category 3
• Diameter of any size and not located in or within 1/2
mile of a USA

• Category 1
– Identify segments by April 3, 2009
– Report according to Subpart B
– IM plan by July 3, 2009 and complete
assessments by July 3, 2015
– Comply with this Part except Subpart H by July
3, 2009
– Comply with Subpart H by July 3, 2011
8
11/3/2011

• Category 2
– Identify segments by July 1, 2012
– IM plan by Oct. 1, 2012 and complete
assessments by Oct. 1, 2016
– Comply with this Part except Subpart H by Oct.
1, 2012
– Comply with Subpart H by Oct. 1, 2014

• Category 3
– Identify segments by July 1, 2011 ??
– IM plan by Oct. 1, 2012 and complete
assessments by Oct. 1, 2016
– Comply with this Part except 195.452 and
Subpart H by Oct. 1, 2012
– Comply with Subpart H by Oct. 1, 2014
9
11/3/2011

• Economic compliance
– Category 1 rural low-stress;
– Transports crude from a production facility;
– Flow rate <= 14,000 bpd; and
– Operator would abandon as a result of economic burden
to comply with 195.452(d) or 195.452(j)
• Operator can apply for special permit for
alternative safety requirements

• Change in USA
– New USA causes pipeline to be Category 1 or 2
– Comply with IM of this section within 12
months; and
– Complete assessments according to
195.452(d)(3)
– If USA boundaries change and pipeline is more
than 1/2 mile from the USA, the operator must
continue to comply with IM, unless a release
could not affect the USA
10
11/3/2011

• Records
– Maintain segment ID records for the life of the
pipeline
– Maintain other records as specified in code
Section or Subpart
§ 195.48 Scope.
• This Subpart prescribes requirements for periodic

reporting and for reporting of accidents and
safety-related conditions. This Subpart applies to
all pipelines subject to this Part. An operator of a
Category 3 rural low-stress pipeline meeting the
criteria in § 195.12 is not required to complete
those parts of the hazardous liquid annual report
form PHMSA F 7000-1.1 associated with IM or
high consequence areas.
11
11/3/2011
49 CFR 192 Transportation of

Gas
• Standards for Increasing the Maximum
Allowable Operating Pressure for Gas
Transmission
• Federal Register: October 17, 2008
(Volume 73, Number 202)
• Effective date: November 17, 2008
Rule Summary
• New safety requirements for some gas

transmission lines to operate at higher stress
levels.
• Will result in an increase in MAOP over what is
currently allowed.
• Boosts potential capacity and efficiency of
pipelines and
• Reduce number and consequence of incidents.
12
11/3/2011
Code Sections
• 192.7 – Adds ASTM A578/578M, revises API 5L

description
• 192.112 – new section with additional design requirements
• 192.328 – new section adds additional construction
requirements
• 192.611 amended to include pipelines with alternative
MAOP
• 192.619 – amended to allow alternative MAOP
• 192.620 – new section describing actions operator must
take for alternative MAOP
13
1/29/2013
Regulatory Update
New Rulemakings
2011 Rulemakings
Jan 10 TSA Guide, Forms TSA
Pipeline Security Guidelines
Jan 10 PHMSA Public Awareness
Program Inspection Form 192, 195
Jan 10 PHMSA Advisory Bulletin
ADB-11-01: Establishing Maximum
Allowable Operating Pressure or Maximum
Operating Pressure 192, 195
1
1/29/2013
2011 Rulemakings
Feb 1 PHMSA Mechanical Fitting
Failure Reporting Requirements 191, 192
Feb 24 PHMSA FAQ Control Room
Management FAQs 192, 195
Apr 14 PHMSA Notice Gas
Transmission and Gathering Systems
Annual Reports, Extension of Annual
Reporting deadline
2011 Rulemakings
Apr 24 PHMSA Notice DIMP
Webinars
May 5 PHMSA FR Applying Safety
Regulations to All Rural Onshore
Hazardous Liquid Low-Stress Lines
May 12 PHMSA Forms DIMP
Inspection Forms
2
1/29/2013
2011 Rulemakings
May 17 PHMSA ADB National Pipeline
Mapping System Data Submissions and
Submission Dates for Gas Transmission and
Gathering Systems and Liquefied Natural Gas
Annual Reports
May 20 PHMSA Notice Meetings of
the Technical Pipeline Safety Standards
Committee and the Technical Hazardous Liquid
Pipeline Safety Standards Committee
2011 Rulemakings
May 26 PHMSA Interp. Farm Taps,
clarification for DIMP 192.1003
Jun 16 PMHSA FR Control Room
Management/Human Factors 192.631
Jul 10 PHMSA FAQ Updates to Public
Awareness FAQs 192.616, 195.440
3
1/29/2013
2011 Rulemakings
Jul 27 PHMSA ADB Advisory Bulletin
(ADB-11-04)Potential for damage to
pipeline facilities caused by severe
flooding.Part 192, 195
Aug 25 PHMSA ANPRM Safety of
Gas Transmission Pipelines Part 192
2011 Rulemakings
Sep 1 PHMSA ADB ADB 11-05,
Potential for Damage to Pipeline Facilities Caused
by the Passage of Hurricanes Parts 192, 195
Oct 11 TSA Notice Extension of Agency
Information Collection Activity Under OMB
Review: Critical Facility Information of the Top
100 Most Critical Pipelines
Nov 2 OST FR Technical amendments to
Part 40.
4
1/29/2013
2011 Rulemakings
Nov 16 PHMSA Notice, ANPRM,
Extension of comment period, Safety of Gas
Transmission Pipelines. Part 192.
Nov 25 PHMSA ANPRM Expanding
the Use of Excess Flow Valves in Gas
Distribution Systems to Applications Other
Than Single-Family Residences. Part 192.
2011 / 2012 Rulemakings

Nov 29 PHMSA NPRM, Miscellaneous
Changes to Pipeline Safety Regulations.
Parts 191, 192, 195, 198.
Jan 4 White House Bill President
Signs Landmark Pipeline Safety
Legislation.
5
1/29/2013
2012 Rulemakings
Jan 13 PHMSA ADB Implementation of
the National Registry of Pipeline and
Liquefied Natural Gas Operators. Parts 191,
193, 195.
Jan 18 PHMSA Notice Annual
Random Drug Testing Rate. Parts 199.
2012 Rulemakings
Feb 23 PHMSA ADB Post Accident
Drug and Alcohol Testing
Mar 6 PHMSA ADB Notice to
Operators of Driscopipe 8000 High Density
Polyethylene Pipe of the Potential for
Material Degradation
6
1/29/2013
2012 Rulemakings
Mar 21 PHMSA ADB Pipeline Safety:
Implementation of the National Registry of
Pipeline and Liquefied Natural Gas
Operators
Mar 23 PHMSA ADB Pipeline Safety:
Cast Iron Pipe (Supplementary Advisory
Bulletin)192
2012 Rulemakings
Apr 2 PHMSA NPRM Pipeline
Safety: Pipeline Damage Prevention
Programs 190, 196 (new)
Apr 13 PHMSA Notice Pipeline
Safety: Information Collection Activities,
Revision
May 6 PHMSA ADB Verification of
Records. ADB-2012-6
7
1/29/2013
2012 Rulemakings
Jun 9 PHMSA ADB Advisory Bulletin
(ADB-2012-07), Mechanical Fitting Failure
Reports
Jul 31 PHMSA ADB Inspection and
Protection of Pipeline Facilities After Railway
Accidents, ADB-2012-08
Aug 13 PHMSA NPRM Updates the
administrative civil penalty maximums and
amends other administrative procedures
2012 Rulemakings
Oct 11 PHMSA ADB Advisory Bulletin
(ADB-2012-09).Communication During
Emergency Situations 192, 193, 195
Nov 28 DOT Notice 2013 DOT Random
Testing Rates Notice Part 199
Dec 5 DOT Notice Compliance Notice,
Recreational and Medical Use of Marijuana
Part 40
8
1/29/2013
2012 Rulemakings
Dec 5 PHMSA ADB Pipeline Safety:
Using Meaningful Metrics in Conducting
Integrity Management Program Evaluations
Parts 192, 195
Dec 13 PHMSA Forms Updated
Gas Transmission, Gas Gathering Annual
reports, extension of filing deadline. Links
to reports.
2012 Rulemakings
Dec 21 PHMSA ADB Reporting of
Exceedances of Maximum Allowable Operating
Pressure. (ADB 2012-11)
Jan 2 PHMSA Notice Notice of
Availability of Final Environmental Assessment
for the Longhorn Pipeline Reversal
Jan 26 PHMSA Notice Annual
Reports and Validation
9
1/29/2013
Safety of Gas Transmission Pipelines
Advance notice of proposed

rulemaking
Safety of Gas Transmission

Pipelines
Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM)
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Are changes needed to the regulations?
High Consequence Areas
Valves and valve spacing
Corrosion control
Numerous other areas
Integrity Management has increased level of safety
BUT
10
1/29/2013
Safety of Gas Transmission

Pipelines
Incidents with significant consequences still occur

San Bruno
IM inspections have identified concerns that IM
regulations need clarification and enhancement
Safety enhancements in non-HCA areas may be
needed
So –
Comments requested on IM and non-IM areas
IM Topics
Modifying the definition of an HCA.
Strengthening the Integrity Management
requirements in part 192.
Modifying repair criteria.
Revising the requirements for collecting,
validating, and integrating pipeline data.
11
1/29/2013
IM Topics
Making requirements related to the nature and
application of risk models more prescriptive.
Strengthening requirements for applying
knowledge gained through the IM program.
Strengthening requirements on the selection and
use of assessment methods, including prescribing
assessment methods for certain threats (such as
manufacturing and construction defects, SCC,
etc.) or in certain situations such as when certain
knowledge is not available or data is missing.
Non- IM Topics
Valve spacing and the need for remotely- or
automatically- controlled valves.
Corrosion control.
Pipe with longitudinal weld seams with systemic
integrity issues.
Establishing requirements applicable to
underground gas storage.
12
1/29/2013
Non- IM Topics
Management of Change.
Quality Management Systems (QMS).
Exemptions applicable to facilities installed
prior to the regulations.
Gathering lines.
A. Modifying the Definition of

HCA
Revise criteria for HCA to expand mileage?

Make all class 3 & 4 subject to IM?
Is risk based criteria identifying areas where
there is no benefit?
Is the PIR sufficient to protect the public?
Should HCAs consider other infrastructure
such as electric transmission lines?
Should there be more safety measures for
areas outside HCAs?
13
1/29/2013
B. Strengthening Requirements To Implement

Preventive and Mitigative Measures for Pipeline
Segments in HCAs
How do operators identify P&M measures?

What voluntary measures have been
implemented?
Are additional prescriptive measures
needed?
What measures should operators be required
to implement?
Should there be additional requirements for
areas outside HCAs?
C. Modifying Repair Criteria

Should immediate repair criteria be revised to a
higher threshold?
Should anomalous conditions outside HCAs be
subject to IM repair schedule?
Should a risk tier approach be used? HCA first,
then non-HCA?
What should non-HCA repair schedules be for
conditions found during integrity assessments?
How do operators address tool uncertainty?
Should PHMSA adopt ILI standards?
14
1/29/2013
D. Improving Requirements for Collecting,

Validating, and Integrating Pipeline Data
What practices are used to acquire, integrate

and validate data?
Do operators collect data when the pipeline
is exposed to validate records?
Do operators verify data on a periodic
basis?
Should PHMSA make regulations more
stringent on data collection and validation?
E. Making Requirements Related to the Nature and

Application of Risk Models More Prescriptive
Should PHMSA strengthen requirements on

risk models?
Are risk models robust enough?
How are existing models used?
Can existing models understand major
contributors to risk and are able to segment
risk and support decisions?
How can risk models be improved?
15
1/29/2013
F. Strengthening Requirements for Applying

Knowledge Gained Through the IM Program
What practices do operators use to comply with

192.917(e)(5)?
How often do reviews of other areas result in
investigations and repairs on additional piping?
Should regulations specify a maximum period in
which assessments be reviewed and validated?
Are there additional requirements?
What do operators require for data integration to
improve safety?
G. Strengthening Requirements on the

Selection and Use of Assessment Methods
Have anomalies that require repair been identified by

assessment ?
Should ILI be required whenever possible?
How do operators determine when direct assessment would be
practical?
How many miles have been modified for ILI?
What standards are used for ILI?
Does NACE standard address full lifecycle for SCC?
Should a one-time pressure test be required to address
manufacturing and construction defects?
Have operators conducted quality audits of direct assessments?
16
1/29/2013
H. Valve Spacing and the Need for Remotely

or Automatically Controlled Valves
Are valve spacing requirements adequate?

Should other factors besides class location be considered?
Should regulations be revised to require new valve when
the class location changes?
Should new valves be required under other conditions?
What percentage of valves are remotely operated?
Should all sectionalizing block valves be remotely
operated?
Should there be prescriptive decision requirements for
additional valves and/or automation?
I. Corrosion Control
Should PHMSA revise Subpart I to add specificity?
Should PHMSA prescribe additional requirements for
post-construction surveys for coating damage?
Should PHMSA require periodic interference current
surveys?
Should there be prescriptive requirements for identify and
remediation of SCC?
Does NACE standard address all lifecycle concerns for
SCC?
Should there be timing intervals for HCA and non-HCA
pipelines for CIS?
17
1/29/2013
I. Corrosion Control
Should there be prescriptive corrosion control measures
with defined conditions for HCA and non-HCA?
Are there tools to detect accurately and reliably the
severity of SCC?
Should operators perform critical analysis of all factors to
determine if SCC is a credible threat?
Should PHMSA require an integrity assessment using
methods capable of detecting SCC whenever a credible
threat of SCC is identified?
Should PHMSA require periodic analysis of the
effectiveness of a corrosion control program?
J. Pipe Manufactured Using

Longitudinal Weld Seams
Should all pipelines that have not been pressure tested at
or above 1.1 times MAOP or class location test criteria
(Sec. Sec. 192.505, 192.619 and 192.620), be required
to be pressure tested in accordance with the present
regulations?
Are alternative minimum test pressures (other than those
specified in subpart J) appropriate, and why?
Can ILI be used to find seam integrity issues?
Are other technologies available?
Should additional pressure test requirements be applied
to all pipelines, or only pipelines in HCAs, or only
pipelines in Class 2, 3, or 4 location areas?
18
1/29/2013
K. Establishing Requirements Applicable to

Underground Gas Storage
Should PHMSA develop Federal standards governing the safety

of underground gas storage facilities?
What standards exist?
What standards are used to monitor corrosion?
What standards are used for welding, pressure testing and design
of casing and tubing?
Should wellhead values have emergency shutdowns both
primary and secondary?
What standards are used for emergency shutdowns, gas
monitoring and emergency/public communication?
Do lack of regulations and preemption provisions preclude
regulation by states?
L. Management of Change
Are there standards used by the pipeline
industry to guide management processes
including management of change?
Are standards used in other industries (e.g.,
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration standards at 29 CFR
1910.119) appropriate for use in the
pipeline industry?
19
1/29/2013
M. Quality Management Systems

(QMS)
What standards and practices are used within the pipeline
industry to assure quality?
Should PHMSA establish requirements for QMS?
Do gas transmission pipeline operators require their
construction contractors to maintain and use formal QMS?
Are contractors required to read specifications and participate
in skills training?
Are there any standards that exist that PHMSA could adopt or
from which PHMSA could adapt concepts for QMS?
What has been the impact on cost and safety in other industries
in which requirements for a QMS have been mandated?
N. Exemption of Facilities Installed

Prior to the Regulations
Should PHMSA repeal provisions in part 192 that allow use of
materials manufactured prior to 1970 and that do not otherwise meet
all requirements in part 192?
Should PHMSA repeal the MAOP exemption for pre-1970 pipelines?
Should pipelines operating above 72% SMYS be allowed to continue
to operate without increased safety evaluations such as pressure tests,
ILI and other requirements?
Should PHMSA take any other actions with respect to exempt
pipelines?
If a pipeline has pipe with a vintage history of systemic integrity issues
in areas such as longitudinal weld seams or steel quality, and has not
been pressure tested at or above 1.1 times MAOP or class location test
criteria should this pipeline be required to be pressure tested in
accordance with present regulations?
20
1/29/2013
O. Modifying the Regulation of Gas

Gathering Lines
Should PHMSA amend 49 CFR part 191 to require the
submission of annual, incident, and safety-related
conditions reports by the operators of all gathering lines?
Should PHMSA amend 49 CFR part 192 to include a new
definition for the term “gathering line”?
Are there any difficulties in applying the definitions
contained in RP 80?
Should PHMSA consider short sections of pipeline
downstream of processing, compression, and similar
equipment to be a continuation of gathering?
O. Modifying the Regulation of Gas

Gathering Lines
Should PHMSA consider adopting specific

requirements for pipelines associated with
landfill gas systems?
Should there be regulations for internal
corrosion on gathering lines?
Should PHMSA apply its Gas Integrity
Management Requirements to onshore gas
gathering lines?
21
Interpretations and Notes
192 Subpart A – General

§192.3 Definitions
"Transmission line" means a pipeline, other than a gathering
line that:
(a) Transports gas from a gathering line or storage facility
to a distribution center, storage facility, or large volume
customer that is not downstream from a distribution
center;
(b) Operates at a hoop stress of 20 percent or more of
SMYS; or
(c) Transports gas within a storage field.
“If a company meets any one of these three
conditions, it is a transmission line. The fact
that a pipeline operates at less than 20 percent
of SMYS does not negate the fact.” Clearly
indicated in OPS Interpretation 2/15/01
Outer Continental Shelf - definitions
• In scientific terms, that part of the continental

shelf which is deeper than 200 meters.
• Under the Outer Continental Shelf Land Act,
that part of the continental shelf which is more
than 3 miles offshore and under federal
jurisdiction
• within 3 miles of the shore is subject to state
jurisdiction. See 43 U.S.C. §1331(a); NGPA §
2(35); 18 C.F.R. Part 280.
No. 82-7
Date: July 30, 1982
RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION
MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU
_________________________________________________________________ PIPELINE
SAFETY REGULATORY INTERPRETATION
_________________________________________________________________
NOTE: A pipeline safety regulatory interpretation applies a particular rule to a particular set of
facts and circumstances, and, as such, may be relied upon only by those persons to whom the
interpretation is specifically addressed.
SECTION: 192.5(e) and (f)
SUBJECT: Class locations.
FACTS: Paragraph (e) refers to buildings with four or more stories in a plural sense.
Paragraph (f)(1) refers to building in a singular sense.
QUESTION: Does encroachment by a single building of four or more stories require upgrading
to a Class 4 location?
INTERPRETATION: Having a single four or more story building within 220 yards of a gas
pipeline does not require upgrading to Class 4 requirements because paragraph (e) states in part:
"where buildings with four or more stories above ground are prevalent." The use of "prevalent"
indicates that they are common or that there are more than one such building in the area.
Therefore, a single four or more story building would not cause an area to be designated a Class 4
location.
Subparagraph (f)(1) uses "building" in the singular because it is referring to the nearest building
in group or cluster to which the boundary adjustment of 220 yards applies in relation to other
dwelling units.
Melvin A. Judah
Acting Associate Director
Pipeline Safety Regulation
Materials Transportation Bureau
GPTC Guide for Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
2009 Edition
January 2009
Appendix G-192-11. Gas leakage control guidelines for natural gas systems
GAS LEAKAGE CONTROL GUIDELINES
FOR NATURAL GAS SYSTEMS
(METHANE)
…
TABLE 3a – LEAK CLASSIFICATION AND ACTION CRITERIA – GRADE 1
Grade Definition Action Criteria Examples
1 A leak that represents Requires prompt 1. Any leak which, in
an existing or action* to protect life the judgment of
probable hazard to and property, and operating personnel at
persons or property, continuous action the scene, is regarded
and requires until the conditions as an immediate
immediate repair or are no longer hazard.2. Escaping
continuous action hazardous.*The gas that has ignited. 3.
until the conditions prompt action in some Any indication of gas
are no longer instances may require which has migrated
hazardous. See one or more of the into or under a
§192.703(c). following.a. building, or into a
Implementation of tunnel.4. Any reading
emergency plan at the outside wall of a
(§192.615).b. building, or where gas
Evacuating would likely migrate
premises.c. Blocking to an outside wall of a
off an area.d. building.5. Any
Rerouting traffic.e. reading of 80% LEL,
Eliminating sources of or greater, in a
ignition.f. Venting the confined space.6.
area by removing Any reading of 80%
manhole covers, LEL, or greater in
barholing, installing small substructures
vent holes, or other (other than gas
means.g. Stopping the associated
flow of gas by closing substructures) from
valves or other which gas would
means.h. Notifying likely migrate to the
police and fire outside wall of a
departments. building.7. Any leak
that can be seen,
heard, or felt, and
which is in a location
that may endanger the
general public or
property.
TABLE 3b - LEAK CLASSIFICATION AND ACTION CRITERIA - GRADE 2
2 A leak that is Leaks should be A. Leaks Requiring
recognized as being repaired or cleared Action Ahead of
non-hazardous at the within one calendar Ground Freezing or
time of detection, but year, but no later than Other Adverse
justifies scheduled 15 months from the Changes in Venting
repair based on date the leak was Conditions.Any leak
probable future reported. In which, under frozen
hazard. determining the repair or other adverse soil
priority, criteria such conditions, would
as the following likely migrate to the
should be outside wall of a
considered.a. Amount building. B. Leaks
and migration of Requiring Action
gas.b. Proximity of Within Six Months 1.
gas to buildings and Any reading of 40%
subsurface LEL, or greater, under
structures.c. Extent of a sidewalk in a wall-
pavement.d. Soil type, to-wall paved area
and soil conditions, that does not qualify
such as frost cap, as a Grade 1 leak.2.
moisture and natural Any reading of 100%
venting.Grade 2 leaks LEL, or greater, under
should be reevaluated a street in a wall-to-
at least once every six wall paved area that
months until cleared. has significant gas
The frequency of migration and does
reevaluation should be not qualify as a Grade
determined by the 1 leak.3. Any reading
location and less than 80% LEL in
magnitude of the small substructures
leakage (other than gas
condition. Grade 2 associated
leaks may vary greatly substructures) from
in degree of potential which gas would
hazard. Some Grade 2 likely migrate creating
leaks, when evaluated a probable future
by the above criteria, hazard.4. Any reading
may justify scheduled between 20% LEL
repair within the next and 80% LEL in a
5 working days. confined space.5. Any
Others will justify reading on a pipeline
repair within 30 days. operating at 30
During the working percent SMYS, or
day on which the leak greater, in a class 3 or
is discovered, these 4 location, which does
situations should be not qualify as a Grade
brought to the 1 leak.6. Any reading
attention of the of 80% LEL, or
individual responsible greater, in gas
for scheduling leak associated
repair. On the other substructures.7. Any
hand, many Grade 2 leak which, in the
leaks, because of their judgment of operating
location and personnel at the scene,
magnitude, can be is of sufficient
scheduled for repair magnitude to justify
on a normal routine scheduled repair.
basis with periodic
reinspection as
necessary.
TABLE 3c - LEAK CLASSIFICATION AND ACTION CRITERIA - GRADE 3

3 A leak that is non- These leaks should be Leaks Requiring
hazardous at the time reevaluated during the Reevaluation at
of detection and can next scheduled Periodic Intervals1.
be reasonably survey, or within 15 Any reading of less
expected to remain months of the date than 80% LEL in
non-hazardous. reported, whichever small gas associated
occurs first, until the substructures.2. Any
leak is regraded or no reading under a street
longer results in a in areas without wall-
reading. to-wall paving where
it is unlikely the gas
could migrate to the
outside wall of a
building.3. Any
reading of less than
20% LEL in a
confined space.
Pipeline Safety Laws
Regulations
Pipeline Safety,
Regulatory Certainty,
and Job Creation Act
of 2011
Pipeline Safety Acts
The Acts authorize the

Secretary of Transportation to
prescribe safety standards for
the transportation of gas and
hazardous liquids
1
Part 190 Enforcement Procedures
Part 191 Reporting Requirements
Part 192 Gas Pipeline Safety Minimum
Safety Standards
Part 193 LNG Facility Safety
Part 194 Response Plans for Onshore
Oil Pipelines

Part 195 Liquid Pipeline Minimum
Safety Standards
Part 198 Grants to State Pipeline
Programs
Part 199 Drug Testing
Part 40 Procedures for Workplace Drug
Testing Programs (OST)
2
Oil Pollution and
the Environment
– Requires operators to prepare plans for oil
spill response
– 49 CFR 194 implemented January 1993
– Final rule, 2/23/05, eff. 3/25/05
Pipeline Safety Act of 1992 added "and the
protection of the environment", to the law.
Recodification
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968,
as amended, and
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act of
1979, as amended
Recodified as USC Chapter 601 in 1994
3
Creating a Regulation
Congress grants authority to DOT
PHMSA designated agency to create and enforce
regulation
Need for regulation
– Congressional mandate
– OPS identifies need
– NTSB recommendation
– Request from industry/NAPSR/public
– TPSSC/HLPSSC recommendation
Creating a regulation
Published in Federal Register
Docket Management System http://dms.dot.gov
– ANPRM
– NPRM
• OPS review/TPSSC/HLPSSC
– Public Meetings
– Comment period
– Final rule
Read the comments and preambles!!!!
4
Pipeline Safety
Reauthorization
Pipeline Safety,
Regulatory Certainty,
and Job Creation Act
of 2011
Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and

Job Creation Act of 2011
Signed by President on January 3, 2012

Reauthorizes pipeline safety/PHMSA
through FY 2015.
Strengthens enforcement.
Addresses NTSB recommendations.
5
Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty,
and Job Creation Act of 2011
Sec. 2. Civil penalties.
– Doubles penalties, $100,00 to $200,00 per
violation, maximum from $1 million to $2
million.
Sec. 3. Damage Prevention.
– To qualify for grants states may not exclude
municipalities, state agencies from one-call.
– Conduct a study of excavation damage.

Sec. 4. Automatic and remote controlled
shut-off valves.
– Within 2 years, if appropriate, require ACV or
RCV on new and replaced transmission lines.
– Study HCAs and ability to respond or
shutdown.
6
Sec. 5. Integrity Management.
– Evaluate if IM should be expanded beyond
HCAs and if this would mitigate the need for
class location.
– Regulations may be issued on the above after
review period.
– May issue regulations if determines there is an
“imminent hazard”.

– Comptroller general to determine if risk-based
reassessments are more effective.
Sec. 6. Public Awareness.
– Include HCAs on NPMS.
– Promote Awareness of NPMS.
– Issue guidance to operators on providing
information to emergency response agencies.
– DOT/PHMSA to maintain file of response
plans and provide if asked.
7
Sec. 7. Cast Iron Pipelines.
– Every 2 years measure effectives of
replacement programs and submit report.
Sec. 8. Leak Detection.
– Report on leak detection systems for liquid
pipelines.
– If practicable issue standards.

Sec. 9. Accident and incident notification.
– Establish specific time limits for notifications.
Sec. 10. Onshore facility response plans.
– Editorial changes to Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.
Sec. 11.
– Additional data collection for NPMS
authorized if needed.
8
Sec. 12. Transportations related oil flow
lines.
– Authorizes data collection. Oil flow lines are
lines off the grounds of a well across areas not
owned by the producer. Does not authorize
standards.
Sec. 13. Cost recovery for design reviews.
– DOT may collect fees for design review.

Sec. 14. Biofuel pipelines.
– Adds biofuel to definition of hazardous
liquids.
Sec. 15. Carbon dioxide pipelines.
– Adds regulations for CO2 in a gaseous state.
Sec. 16. Study of diluted bitumen.
– Review of hazardous liquid regulations to
determine if sufficient for diluted bitumen.
9
Sec. 17. Study of nonpetroleum hazardous
liquids transported by pipeline.
– Secretary may study safety of these pipelines
(e.g., chlorine), and submit report.
Sec. 18. Clarifications.
– Editorial clarifications.
Sec. 19. Maintenance of effort.
– Grant of waivers to states for funding.

Sec. 20. Administrative enforcement
process.
– Regulations for hearings of enforcement and
compliance actions.
Sec. 21. Gas and hazardous liquid
gathering lines.
– Review current regulations.
– Recommend regulations if need identified.
10
– Sec. 21. If determined necessary issue
regulations for offshore hazardous liquid
gathering lines.
Sec. 22. Excess flow valves.
– If feasible, require EFVs on branch,
multifamily, and small commercial facilities.

Sec. 23. Maximum Allowable Operating
Pressure.
– Verification of records of transmission lines in
class 3 and 4 locations and class 1 and 2
HCAs.
– Operators to report pipeline segments where
records are insufficient to confirm MAOP.
– Report exceeding MAOP + build-up within 5
days.
11
– Sec. 23. If MAOP cannot be confirmed,
operator must reconfirm and Secretary shall
determine actions to maintain safety until
confirmed.
– Within 18 months issue regulations for testing
previously untested transmission lines in
HCAs operating > 30% SMYS.
• Pressure testing.
• Alternative methods.

Sec. 24. Limitation on Incorporation of
Documents by Reference.
– Starting 1 year after the Act (Jan. 3, 2013) no
new IBR unless standards available to the
public free of charge on the internet.
Sec. 25. Pipeline safety training for state
and local government personnel.
– May provide training to these personnel.
12
Sec. 26. Report on minority-owned,
woman-owned, and disadvantaged
businesses.
– Report on participation of these entities.
Sec. 27. Report on pipeline projects.
– Study on obtaining permits to construct
pipelines.

Sec. 28. Cover over buried pipelines.
– Study of hazardous liquid incidents at water
crossings to determine if cover was a factor.
– If regulations for cover are determined to be
insufficient, issue new regulations.
Sec. 29. Seismicity.
– Operators must consider seismicity in threat
evaulations.
13
Sec. 30. Tribal Consultation for pipeline
projects.
– Develop protocol to provide technical
assistance to Indian tribes.
Sec. 31. Pipeline inspection and
enforcement needs.
– Study current staffing and may add 10 new
FTEs if fill previously authorized positions by
Sept. 30, 2014.

Sec. 32. Authorization of appropriations.
– Provides funding for various pipeline safety
related programs.
14
Pipeline Security
Pipeline Security
September 2002
– DOT Pipeline Security Information Circular
and the Pipeline Security Contingency
Planning Guidance.
– Define critical pipeline facilities
– Identify means to protect
– Explains how DOT OPS will verify security
15
Pipeline Security
Guidelines for protective measures for
specific threats
– Critical pipelines
• Viable terrorist targets
• Important to national energy infrastructure
• Probability the facility could be used as a weapon
to harm people
Pipeline Security
September 2004
– DOT and DHS sign an MOU
– Improve cooperation and coordination
August 2006
– Annex to MOU
– TSA lead role in transportation security
– Build on current initiatives
– Shared commitment to risk-based approach
– Further defines roles of each agency
16
Pipeline Security
Transportation Security Administration
pipeline security page
http://www.tsa.gov/stakeholders/pipeline-
security
Pipeline Corporate Security Review
– On-site visits
– Monthly conference calls
– Security inspections of critical facilities
17
HCON 93 EH Sec. 16. Study of transportation of diluted bitumen.
Sec. 17. Study of nonpetroleum hazardous liquids transported by pipeline.
112th CONGRESS Sec. 18. Clarifications.
1st Session Sec. 19. Maintenance of effort.
H. CON. RES. 93 Sec. 20. Administrative enforcement process.
Sec. 21. Gas and hazardous liquid gathering lines.
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION Sec. 22. Excess flow valves.
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That, in the Sec. 23. Maximum allowable operating pressure.
enrollment of the bill H.R. 2845, the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall Sec. 24. Limitation on incorporation of documents by reference.
make the following correction: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the Sec. 25. Pipeline safety training for State and local government personnel.
following: Sec. 26. Report on minority-owned, woman-owned, and disadvantaged
businesses.
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF TITLE 49, UNITED Sec. 27. Report on pipeline projects.
STATES CODE; DEFINITIONS; TABLE OF CONTENTS. Sec. 28. Cover over buried pipelines.
Sec. 29. Seismicity.
(a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the `Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Sec. 30. Tribal consultation for pipeline projects.
Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011'. Sec. 31. Pipeline inspection and enforcement needs.
(b) Amendment of Title 49, United States Code- Except as otherwise expressly Sec. 32. Authorization of appropriations.
provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of
an amendment to, or a repeal of, a section or other provision, the reference shall SEC. 2. CIVIL PENALTIES.
be considered to be made to a section or other provision of title 49, United States
Code. (a) General Penalties; Penalty Considerations- Section 60122 is amended--
(c) Definitions- (1) in subsection (a)(1)--
(1) APPLICABILITY OF CHAPTER 601 DEFINITIONS- In this Act, (A) in the first sentence by striking `$100,000' and inserting
any term defined in chapter 601 of title 49, United States Code, has the `$200,000'; and
meaning given that term in that chapter. (B) in the last sentence by striking `$1,000,000' and inserting
(2) HIGH-CONSEQUENCE AREA- In this Act, the term `high- `$2,000,000'; and
consequence area' means an area described in section 60109(a) of title 49, (2) in subsection (b)(1)(B) by striking `the ability to pay,'.
United States Code. (b) Operator Assistance in Investigations- Section 60118(e) is amended to read as
(d) Table of Contents- The table of contents for this Act is as follows: follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; amendment of title 49, United States Code; definitions; `(e) Operator Assistance in Investigations-
table of contents. `(1) ASSISTANCE AND ACCESS- If the Secretary or the National
Sec. 2. Civil penalties. Transportation Safety Board investigates an accident or incident involving
Sec. 3. Pipeline damage prevention. a pipeline facility, the operator of the facility shall--
Sec. 4. Automatic and remote-controlled shut-off valves. `(A) make available to the Secretary or the Board all records and
Sec. 5. Integrity management. information that in any way pertain to the accident or incident,
Sec. 6. Public education and awareness. including integrity management plans and test results; and
Sec. 7. Cast iron gas pipelines. `(B) afford all reasonable assistance in the investigation of the
Sec. 8. Leak detection. accident or incident.
Sec. 9. Accident and incident notification. `(2) OPERATOR ASSISTANCE IN INVESTIGATIONS-
Sec. 10. Transportation-related onshore facility response plan compliance. `(A) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may impose a civil penalty
Sec. 11. Pipeline infrastructure data collection. under section 60122 on a person who obstructs or prevents the
Sec. 12. Transportation-related oil flow lines. Secretary from carrying out inspections or investigations under this
Sec. 13. Cost recovery for design reviews. chapter.
Sec. 14. Biofuel pipelines. `(B) OBSTRUCTS DEFINED-
Sec. 15. Carbon dioxide pipelines.
`(i) IN GENERAL- In this paragraph, the term òbstructs' (d) Excavation Damage-
includes actions that were known, or reasonably should (1) STUDY- The Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a study on the
have been known, to prevent, hinder, or impede an impact of excavation damage on pipeline safety.
investigation without good cause. (2) CONTENTS- The study shall include--
`(ii) GOOD CAUSE- In clause (i), the term `good cause' (A) an analysis of the frequency and severity of different types of
may include actions such as restricting access to facilities excavation damage incidents;
that are not secure or safe for nonpipeline personnel or (B) an analysis of exemptions to the one-call notification system
visitors.'. requirements in each State;
(c) Administrative Penalty Caps Inapplicable- Section 60120(a)(1) is amended by (C) a comparison of exemptions to the one-call notification system
adding at the end the following: `The maximum amount of civil penalties for requirements in each State to the types of excavation damage
administrative enforcement actions under section 60122 shall not apply to incidents in that State; and
enforcement actions under this section.'. (D) an analysis of the potential safety benefits and adverse
(d) Judicial Review of Administrative Enforcement Orders- Section 60119(a) is consequences of eliminating all exemptions for mechanized
amended-- excavation from State one-call notification systems.
(1) in the subsection heading by striking ànd Waiver Orders' and inserting (3) REPORT- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this
`, Orders, and Other Final Agency Actions'; and Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and
(2) by striking àbout an application for a waiver under section 60118(c) Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House
or (d) of this title' and inserting ùnder this chapter'. of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of the study.
SEC. 3. PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION.
SEC. 4. AUTOMATIC AND REMOTE-CONTROLLED SHUT-OFF
(a) Minimum Standards for State One-Call Notification Programs- Section VALVES.
6103(a) is amended to read as follows:
`(a) Minimum Standards- Section 60102 is amended--
`(1) IN GENERAL- In order to qualify for a grant under section 6106, a (1) by striking subsection (j)(3); and
State one-call notification program, at a minimum, shall provide for-- (2) by adding at the end the following:
`(A) appropriate participation by all underground facility operators, `(n) Automatic and Remote-Controlled Shut-off Valves for New Transmission
including all government operators; Pipelines-
`(B) appropriate participation by all excavators, including all `(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of
government and contract excavators; and this subsection, and after considering the factors specified in subsection
`(C) flexible and effective enforcement under State law with (b)(2), the Secretary, if appropriate, shall require by regulation the use of
respect to participation in, and use of, one-call notification automatic or remote-controlled shut-off valves, or equivalent technology,
systems. where economically, technically, and operationally feasible on
`(2) EXEMPTIONS PROHIBITED- In order to qualify for a grant under transmission pipeline facilities constructed or entirely replaced after the
section 6106, a State one-call notification program may not exempt date on which the Secretary issues the final rule containing such
municipalities, State agencies, or their contractors from the one-call requirement.
notification system requirements of the program.'. `(2) HIGH-CONSEQUENCE AREA STUDY-
(b) State Damage Prevention Programs- Section 60134(a) is amended-- `(A) STUDY- The Comptroller General of the United States shall
(1) in paragraph (1) by striking ànd' after the semicolon; conduct a study on the ability of transmission pipeline facility
(2) in paragraph (2)(B) by striking `(b).' and inserting `(b); and'; and operators to respond to a hazardous liquid or gas release from a
(3) by adding at the end the following: pipeline segment located in a high-consequence area.
`(3) does not provide any exemptions to municipalities, State agencies, or `(B) CONSIDERATIONS- In conducting the study, the
their contractors from the one-call notification system requirements of the Comptroller General shall consider the swiftness of leak detection
program.'. and pipeline shutdown capabilities, the location of the nearest
(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect 2 years response personnel, and the costs, risks, and benefits of installing
after the date of enactment of this Act. automatic and remote-controlled shut-off valves.
`(C) REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of (d) Data Reporting- The Secretary shall collect any relevant data necessary to
this subsection, the Comptroller General shall submit to the complete the evaluation required by subsection (a).
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the (e) Technical Correction- Section 60109(c)(3)(B) is amended to read as follows:
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of `(B) Subject to paragraph (5), periodic reassessments of the
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and facility, at a minimum of once every 7 calendar years, using
Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of the study.'. methods described in subparagraph (A). The Secretary may extend
such deadline for an additional 6 months if the operator submits
SEC. 5. INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT. written notice to the Secretary with sufficient justification of the
need for the extension.'.
(a) Evaluation- Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, (f) Rulemaking Requirements-
the Secretary of Transportation shall evaluate-- (1) REVIEW PERIOD DEFINED- In this subsection, the term `review
(1) whether integrity management system requirements, or elements period' means the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act
thereof, should be expanded beyond high-consequence areas; and and ending on the earlier of--
(2) with respect to gas transmission pipeline facilities, whether applying (A) the date that is 1 year after the date of completion of the report
integrity management program requirements, or elements thereof, to under subsection (c); or
additional areas would mitigate the need for class location requirements. (B) the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) Factors- In conducting the evaluation under subsection (a), the Secretary shall (2) CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY- In order to provide Congress the
consider, at a minimum, the following: necessary time to review the results of the report required by subsection
(1) The continuing priority to enhance protections for public safety. (c) and implement appropriate recommendations, the Secretary shall not,
(2) The continuing importance of reducing risk in high-consequence areas. during the review period, issue final regulations described in paragraph
(3) The incremental costs of applying integrity management standards to (3)(B).
pipelines outside of high-consequence areas where operators are already (3) STANDARDS-
conducting assessments beyond what is required under chapter 601 of title (A) FINDINGS- As soon as practicable following the review
49, United States Code. period, the Secretary shall issue final regulations described in
(4) The need to undertake integrity management assessments and repairs subparagraph (B), if the Secretary finds, in the report required
in a manner that is achievable and sustainable, and that does not disrupt under subsection (c), that--
pipeline service. (i) integrity management system requirements, or elements
(5) The options for phasing in the extension of integrity management thereof, should be expanded beyond high-consequence
requirements beyond high-consequence areas, including the most effective areas; and
and efficient options for decreasing risks to an increasing number of (ii) with respect to gas transmission pipeline facilities,
people living or working in proximity to pipeline facilities. applying integrity management program requirements, or
(6) The appropriateness of applying repair criteria, such as pressure elements thereof, to additional areas would mitigate the
reductions and special requirements for scheduling remediation, to areas need for class location requirements.
that are not high-consequence areas. (B) REGULATIONS- Regulations issued by the Secretary under
(c) Report- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the subparagraph (A), if any, shall--
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and (i) expand integrity management system requirements, or
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the elements thereof, beyond high-consequence areas; and
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report, (ii) remove redundant class location requirements for gas
based on the evaluation conducted under subsection (a), containing the Secretary's transmission pipeline facilities that are regulated under an
analysis and findings regarding-- integrity management program adopted and implemented
(1) expansion of integrity management requirements, or elements thereof, under section 60109(c)(2) of title 49, United States Code.
beyond high-consequence areas; and (4) SAVINGS CLAUSE-
(2) with respect to gas transmission pipeline facilities, whether applying (A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of this
the integrity management program requirements, or elements thereof, to subsection, the Secretary, during the review period, may issue final
additional areas would mitigate the need for class location requirements. regulations described in paragraph (3)(B), if the Secretary
determines that a condition that poses a risk to public safety,
property, or the environment is present or an imminent hazard information about their pipeline facilities to emergency response agencies
exists and that the regulations will address the risk or hazard. of the communities and jurisdictions in which those facilities are located.
(B) IMMINENT HAZARD DEFINED- In subparagraph (A), the (2) CONSULTATION- Before issuing guidance under paragraph (1), the
term ìmminent hazard' means the existence of a condition related Secretary shall consult with owners and operators of pipeline facilities to
to pipelines or pipeline operations that presents a substantial determine the extent to which the owners and operators are already
likelihood that death, serious illness, severe personal injury, or providing system-specific information about their pipeline facilities to
substantial endangerment to health, property, or the environment emergency response agencies.
may occur. (c) Response Plans-
(g) Report to Congress on Risk-Based Pipeline Reassessment Intervals- Not later (1) IN GENERAL- Chapter 601 is amended by adding at the end the
than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of following:
the United States shall evaluate--
(1) whether risk-based reassessment intervals are a more effective `Sec. 60138. Response plans
alternative for managing risks to pipelines in high-consequence areas once
baseline assessments are complete when compared to the reassessment `(a) In General- The Secretary of Transportation shall--
interval specified in section 60109(c)(3)(B) of title 49, United States `(1) maintain on file a copy of the most recent response plan (as defined in
Code; part 194 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations) prepared by an owner or
(2) the number of anomalies found in baseline assessments required under operator of a pipeline facility; and
section 60109(c)(3)(A) of title 49, United States Code, as compared to the `(2) provide upon written request to a person a copy of the plan, which
number of anomalies found in reassessments required under section may exclude, as the Secretary determines appropriate--
60109(c)(3)(B) of such title; and `(A) proprietary information;
(3) the progress made in implementing the recommendations in GAO `(B) security-sensitive information, including information
Report 06-945 and the current relevance of those recommendations that described in section 1520.5(a) of title 49, Code of Federal
have not been implemented. Regulations;
`(C) specific response resources and tactical resource deployment
SEC. 6. PUBLIC EDUCATION AND AWARENESS. plans; and
`(D) the specific amount and location of worst case discharges (as
(a) National Pipeline Mapping System- Section 60132 is amended by adding at defined in part 194 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations),
the end the following: including the process by which an owner or operator determines
`(d) Map of High-consequence Areas- The Secretary shall-- the worst case discharge.
`(1) maintain, as part of the National Pipeline Mapping System, a map of `(b) Relationship to FOIA- Nothing in this section may be construed to require
designated high-consequence areas (as described in section 60109(a)) in disclosure of information or records that are exempt from disclosure under section
which pipelines are required to meet integrity management program 552 of title 5.'.
regulations, excluding any proprietary or sensitive security information; (2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The analysis for chapter 601 is amended
and by inserting after the item relating to section 60137 the following:
`(2) update the map biennially. `60138. Response plans.'.
`(e) Program To Promote Awareness of National Pipeline Mapping System- Not
later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall SEC. 7. CAST IRON GAS PIPELINES.
develop and implement a program promoting greater awareness of the existence
of the National Pipeline Mapping System to State and local emergency responders (a) Follow-Up Surveys- Section 60108(d) is amended by adding at the end the
and other interested parties. The program shall include guidance on how to use the following:
National Pipeline Mapping System to locate pipelines in communities and local `(4) Not later than December 31, 2012, and every 2 years thereafter, the Secretary
jurisdictions.'. shall conduct a follow-up survey to measure the progress that owners and
(b) Information to Emergency Response Agencies- operators of pipeline facilities have made in adopting and implementing their
(1) GUIDANCE- Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of plans for the safe management and replacement of cast iron gas pipelines.'.
this Act, the Secretary shall issue guidance to owners and operators of (b) Status Report- Not later than December 31, 2013, the Secretary of
pipeline facilities on the importance of providing system-specific Transportation shall transmit to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of (A) require operators of hazardous liquid pipeline facilities to use
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of leak detection systems where practicable; and
the Senate a report that-- (B) establish technically, operationally, and economically feasible
(1) identifies the total mileage of cast iron gas pipelines in the United standards for the capability of such systems to detect leaks.
States; and (4) SAVINGS CLAUSE-
(2) evaluates the progress that owners and operators of pipeline facilities (A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of this
have made in implementing their plans for the safe management and subsection, the Secretary, during the review period, may issue final
replacement of cast iron gas pipelines. regulations described in paragraph (3) if the Secretary determines
that a condition that poses a risk to public safety, property, or the
SEC. 8. LEAK DETECTION. environment is present or an imminent hazard exists and that the
regulations will address the risk or hazard.
(a) Leak Detection Report- (B) IMMINENT HAZARD DEFINED- In subparagraph (A), the
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this term ìmminent hazard' means the existence of a condition related
Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to the Committee on to pipelines or pipeline operations that presents a substantial
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee likelihood that death, serious illness, severe personal injury, or
on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and substantial endangerment to health, property, or the environment
Commerce of the House of Representatives a report on leak detection may occur.
systems utilized by operators of hazardous liquid pipeline facilities and
transportation-related flow lines. SEC. 9. ACCIDENT AND INCIDENT NOTIFICATION.
(2) CONTENTS- The report shall include--
(A) an analysis of the technical limitations of current leak detection (a) Revision of Regulations- Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment
systems, including the ability of the systems to detect ruptures and of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall revise regulations issued under
small leaks that are ongoing or intermittent, and what can be done sections 191.5 and 195.52 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to establish
to foster development of better technologies; and specific time limits for telephonic or electronic notice of accidents and incidents
(B) an analysis of the practicability of establishing technically, involving pipeline facilities to the Secretary and the National Response Center.
operationally, and economically feasible standards for the (b) Minimum Requirements- In revising the regulations, the Secretary, at a
capability of such systems to detect leaks, and the safety benefits minimum, shall--
and adverse consequences of requiring operators to use leak (1) establish time limits for telephonic or electronic notification of an
detection systems. accident or incident to require such notification at the earliest practicable
(b) Rulemaking Requirements- moment following confirmed discovery of an accident or incident and not
(1) REVIEW PERIOD DEFINED- In this subsection, the term `review later than 1 hour following the time of such confirmed discovery;
period' means the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act (2) review procedures for owners and operators of pipeline facilities and
and ending on the earlier of-- the National Response Center to provide thorough and coordinated
(A) the date that is 1 year after the date of completion of the report notification to all relevant State and local emergency response officials,
under subsection (a); or including 911 emergency call centers, for the jurisdictions in which those
(B) the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act. pipeline facilities are located in the event of an accident or incident, and
(2) CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY- In order to provide Congress the revise such procedures as appropriate; and
necessary time to review the results of the report required by subsection (3) require such owners and operators to revise their initial telephonic or
(a) and implement appropriate recommendations, the Secretary, during the electronic notice to the Secretary and the National Response Center with
review period, shall not issue final regulations described in paragraph (3). an estimate of the amount of the product released, an estimate of the
(3) STANDARDS- As soon as practicable following the review period, if number of fatalities and injuries, if any, and any other information
the report required by subsection (a) finds that it is practicable to establish determined appropriate by the Secretary within 48 hours of the accident or
technically, operationally, and economically feasible standards for the incident, to the extent practicable.
capability of leak detection systems to detect leaks, the Secretary shall (c) Updating of Reports- After receiving revisions described in subsection (b)(3),
issue final regulations that-- the National Response Center shall update the initial report on an accident or
incident instead of generating a new report.
SEC. 10. TRANSPORTATION-RELATED ONSHORE FACILITY `(1) IN GENERAL-
RESPONSE PLAN COMPLIANCE. `(A) REVIEW COSTS- For any project described in subparagraph
(B), if the Secretary conducts facility design safety reviews in
(a) In General- Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 311(m)(2) of the Federal connection with a proposal to construct, expand, or operate a gas
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321(m)(2)) are each amended by or hazardous liquid pipeline facility or liquefied natural gas
striking Àdministrator or' and inserting Àdministrator, the Secretary of pipeline facility, including construction inspections and oversight,
Transportation, or'. the Secretary may require the person proposing the project to pay
(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 311(b)(6)(A) of the Federal Water Pollution the costs incurred by the Secretary relating to such reviews. If the
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6)(A)) is amended by striking òperating or' and Secretary exercises the cost recovery authority described in this
inserting òperating, the Secretary of Transportation, or'. paragraph, the Secretary shall prescribe a fee structure and
assessment methodology that is based on the costs of providing
SEC. 11. PIPELINE INFRASTRUCTURE DATA COLLECTION. these reviews and shall prescribe procedures to collect fees under
this paragraph. The Secretary may not collect design safety review
(a) In General- Section 60132(a) is amended by adding at the end the following: fees under this paragraph and section 60301 for the same design
`(4) Any other geospatial or technical data, including design and material safety review.
specifications, that the Secretary determines are necessary to carry out the `(B) PROJECTS TO WHICH APPLICABLE- Subparagraph (A)
purposes of this section. The Secretary shall give reasonable notice to applies to any project that--
operators that the data are being requested.'. `(i) has design and construction costs totaling at least
(b) Disclosure Limited to FOIA Requirements- Section 60132, as amended by this $2,500,000,000, as periodically adjusted by the Secretary to
Act, is further amended by adding at the end the following: take into account increases in the Consumer Price Index for
`(f) Public Disclosure Limited- The Secretary may not disclose information all-urban consumers published by the Department of Labor,
collected pursuant to subsection (a) except to the extent permitted by section 552 based on--
of title 5.'. `(I) the cost estimate provided to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission in an application for a
certificate of public convenience and necessity for a
SEC. 12. TRANSPORTATION-RELATED OIL FLOW LINES. gas pipeline facility or an application for
authorization for a liquefied natural gas pipeline
Section 60102, as amended by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end facility; or
the following: `(II) a good faith estimate developed by the person
`(o) Transportation-Related Oil Flow Lines- proposing a hazardous liquid pipeline facility and
`(1) DATA COLLECTION- The Secretary may collect geospatial or submitted to the Secretary; or
technical data on transportation-related oil flow lines, including `(ii) uses new or novel technologies or design, as
unregulated transportation-related oil flow lines. determined by the Secretary.
`(2) TRANSPORTATION-RELATED OIL FLOW LINE DEFINED- In `(2) NOTIFICATION- For any new pipeline facility construction project
this subsection, the term `transportation-related oil flow line' means a in which the Secretary will conduct design reviews, the person proposing
pipeline transporting oil off of the grounds of the well where it originated the project shall notify the Secretary and provide the design specifications,
and across areas not owned by the producer, regardless of the extent to construction plans and procedures, and related materials at least 120 days
which the oil has been processed, if at all. prior to the commencement of construction. To the maximum extent
`(3) LIMITATION- Nothing in this subsection authorizes the Secretary to practicable, not later than 90 days after receiving such design
prescribe standards for the movement of oil through production, refining, specifications, construction plans and procedures, and related materials,
or manufacturing facilities or through oil production flow lines located on the Secretary shall provide written comments, feedback, and guidance on
the grounds of wells.'. the project.
`(3) PIPELINE SAFETY DESIGN REVIEW FUND-
SEC. 13. COST RECOVERY FOR DESIGN REVIEWS. `(A) ESTABLISHMENT- There is established a Pipeline Safety
Design Review Fund in the Treasury of the United States.
(a) In General- Section 60117(n) is amended to read as follows:
`(n) Cost Recovery for Design Reviews-
`(B) DEPOSITS- The Secretary shall deposit funds paid under this dioxide for transportation by pipeline at production, refining, or
subsection into the Fund. manufacturing facilities.'.
`(C) USE- Amounts in the Fund shall be available to the Secretary,
in amounts specified in appropriations Acts, to offset the costs of SEC. 16. STUDY OF TRANSPORTATION OF DILUTED BITUMEN.
conducting facility design safety reviews under this subsection.
`(4) NO ADDITIONAL PERMITTING AUTHORITY- Nothing in this Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
subsection may be construed as authorizing the Secretary to require a Transportation shall complete a comprehensive review of hazardous liquid
person to obtain a permit before beginning design and construction in pipeline facility regulations to determine whether the regulations are sufficient to
connection with a project described in paragraph (1)(B).'. regulate pipeline facilities used for the transportation of diluted bitumen. In
(b) Guidance- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the conducting the review, the Secretary shall conduct an analysis of whether any
Secretary of Transportation shall issue guidance to clarify the meaning of the term increase in the risk of a release exists for pipeline facilities transporting diluted
`new or novel technologies or design' as used in section 60117(n)(1)(B)(ii) of title bitumen. The Secretary shall report the results of the review to the Committee on
49, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a) of this section. Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of
SEC. 14. BIOFUEL PIPELINES. the House of Representatives.
Section 60101(a)(4) is amended-- SEC. 17. STUDY OF NONPETROLEUM HAZARDOUS LIQUIDS

(1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ànd' after the semicolon; TRANSPORTED BY PIPELINE.
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following: The Secretary of Transportation may conduct an analysis of the transportation of
`(B) nonpetroleum fuel, including biofuel, that is flammable, toxic, nonpetroleum hazardous liquids by pipeline facility for the purpose of identifying
or corrosive or would be harmful to the environment if released in the extent to which pipeline facilities are currently being used to transport
significant quantities; and'. nonpetroleum hazardous liquids, such as chlorine, from chemical production
facilities across land areas not owned by the producer that are accessible to the
SEC. 15. CARBON DIOXIDE PIPELINES. public. The analysis should identify the extent to which the safety of the pipeline
facilities is unregulated by the States and evaluate whether the transportation of
Section 60102(i) is amended-- such chemicals by pipeline facility across areas accessible to the public would
(1) by striking `The Secretary shall regulate' and inserting the following: present significant risks to public safety, property, or the environment in the
`(1) TRANSPORTATION IN LIQUID STATE- The Secretary shall absence of regulation. The results of the analysis shall be made available to the
regulate'. Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy
`(2) TRANSPORTATION IN GASEOUS STATE- and Commerce of the House of Representatives.
`(A) MINIMUM SAFETY STANDARDS- The Secretary shall
prescribe minimum safety standards for the transportation of SEC. 18. CLARIFICATIONS.
carbon dioxide by pipeline in a gaseous state.
`(B) CONSIDERATIONS- In establishing the standards, the (a) Inspection and Maintenance- Section 60108(a)(1) is amended by striking àn
Secretary shall consider whether applying the minimum safety intrastate' and inserting à'.
standards in part 195 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, as in (b) Owner and Operator- Section 60102(a)(2)(A) is amended by striking òwners
effect on the date of enactment of this paragraph, for the and operators' and inserting àny or all of the owners or operators'.
transportation of carbon dioxide in a liquid state to the
transportation of carbon dioxide in a gaseous state would ensure SEC. 19. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.
safety.
`(3) LIMITATION ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in
Section 60107(b) is amended by adding at the end the following: `For each of
this subsection authorizes the Secretary to regulate piping or equipment
fiscal years 2012 and 2013, the Secretary shall grant such a waiver to a State if the
used in the production, extraction, recovery, lifting, stabilization,
State can demonstrate an inability to maintain or increase the required funding
separation, or treatment of carbon dioxide or the preparation of carbon
share of its safety program at or above the level required by this subsection due to
economic hardship in that State. For fiscal year 2014, and each fiscal year (a) Review- The Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a review of existing
thereafter, the Secretary may grant such a waiver to a State if the State can make Federal and State regulations for gas and hazardous liquid gathering lines located
the demonstration described in the preceding sentence.'. onshore and offshore in the United States, including within the inlets of the Gulf
of Mexico.
SEC. 20. ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS. (b) Report to Congress-
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of
(a) Issuance of Regulations- this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the
this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall issue regulations-- House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
(A) requiring hearings under sections 60112, 60117, 60118, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of the review.
60122 of title 49, United States Code, to be convened before a (2) RECOMMENDATIONS- The report shall include the Secretary's
presiding official; recommendations with respect to--
(B) providing the opportunity for any person requesting a hearing (A) the sufficiency of existing Federal and State laws and
under section 60112, 60117, 60118, or 60122 of such title to regulations to ensure the safety of gas and hazardous liquid
arrange for a transcript of the hearing, at the expense of the gathering lines;
requesting person; (B) the economic impacts, technical practicability, and challenges
(C) ensuring expedited review of any order issued pursuant to of applying existing Federal regulations to gathering lines that are
section 60112(e) of such title; not currently subject to Federal regulation when compared to the
(D) implementing a separation of functions between personnel public safety benefits; and
involved with the investigation and prosecution of an enforcement (C) subject to a risk-based assessment, the need to modify or
case and advising the Secretary on findings and determinations; revoke existing exemptions from Federal regulation for gas and
and hazardous liquid gathering lines.
(E) prohibiting ex-parte communication relevant to the question to (c) Offshore Gathering Lines- Section 60108(c) is amended by adding at the end
be decided in such a case by parties to an investigation or hearing. the following:
(2) PRESIDING OFFICIAL- The regulations issued under this subsection `(8) If, after reviewing existing Federal and State regulations for hazardous liquid
shall-- gathering lines located offshore in the United States, including within the inlets of
(A) define the term `presiding official' to mean the person who the Gulf of Mexico, the Secretary determines it is appropriate, the Secretary shall
conducts any hearing relating to civil penalty assessments, issue regulations, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, subjecting
compliance orders, safety orders, or corrective action orders; and offshore hazardous liquid gathering lines and hazardous liquid gathering lines
(B) require that the presiding official be an attorney on the staff of located within the inlets of the Gulf of Mexico to the same standards and
the Deputy Chief Counsel of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials regulations as other hazardous liquid gathering lines. The regulations issued under
Safety Administration that is not engaged in investigative or this paragraph shall not apply to production pipelines or flow lines.'.
prosecutorial functions, including the preparation of notices of
probable violations, notices relating to civil penalty assessments, SEC. 22. EXCESS FLOW VALVES.
notices relating to compliance, or notices of proposed corrective
actions. Section 60109(e)(3) is amended--
(3) EXPEDITED REVIEW- The regulations issued under this subsection (1) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); and
shall define the term èxpedited review' for the purposes of paragraph (2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
(1)(C). `(B) DISTRIBUTION BRANCH SERVICES, MULTIFAMILY
(b) Standards of Judicial Review- Section 60119(a) is amended by adding at the FACILITIES, AND SMALL COMMERCIAL FACILITIES- Not
end the following new paragraph: later than 2 years after the date of enactment of the Pipeline Safety,
`(3) A judicial review of agency action under this section shall apply the standards Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011, and after
of review established in section 706 of title 5.'. issuing a final report on the evaluation of the National
Transportation Safety Board's recommendation on excess flow
SEC. 21. GAS AND HAZARDOUS LIQUID GATHERING LINES. valves in applications other than service lines serving one single
family residence, the Secretary, if appropriate, shall by regulation
require the use of excess flow valves, or equivalent technology, `(A) require the owner or operator to reconfirm a maximum
where economically, technically, and operationally feasible on new allowable operating pressure as expeditiously as economically
or entirely replaced distribution branch services, multifamily feasible; and
facilities, and small commercial facilities.'. `(B) determine what actions are appropriate for the pipeline owner
or operator to take to maintain safety until a maximum allowable
SEC. 23. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE OPERATING PRESSURE. operating pressure is confirmed.
`(2) INTERIM ACTIONS- In determining the actions for an owner or
(a) In General- Chapter 601, as amended by this Act, is further amended by operator of a pipeline facility to take under paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary
adding at the end the following: shall take into account potential consequences to public safety and the
environment, potential impacts on pipeline system reliability and
`Sec. 60139. Maximum allowable operating pressure deliverability, and other factors, as appropriate.
`(d) Testing Regulations-
`(a) Verification of Records- `(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment
`(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary of Transportation shall require each of this section, the Secretary shall issue regulations for conducting tests to
owner or operator of a pipeline facility to conduct, not later than 6 months confirm the material strength of previously untested natural gas
after the date of enactment of this section, a verification of the records of transmission pipelines located in high-consequence areas and operating at
the owner or operator relating to the interstate and intrastate gas a pressure greater than 30 percent of specified minimum yield strength.
transmission pipelines of the owner or operator in class 3 and class 4 `(2) CONSIDERATIONS- In developing the regulations, the Secretary
locations and class 1 and class 2 high-consequence areas. shall consider safety testing methodologies, including, at a minimum--
`(2) PURPOSE- The purpose of the verification shall be to ensure that the `(A) pressure testing; and
records accurately reflect the physical and operational characteristics of `(B) other alternative methods, including in-line inspections,
the pipelines described in paragraph (1) and confirm the established determined by the Secretary to be of equal or greater effectiveness.
maximum allowable operating pressure of the pipelines. `(3) COMPLETION OF TESTING- The Secretary, in consultation with
`(3) ELEMENTS- The verification process under this subsection shall the Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and State
include such elements as the Secretary considers appropriate. regulators, as appropriate, shall establish timeframes for the completion of
`(b) Reporting- such testing that take into account potential consequences to public safety
`(1) DOCUMENTATION OF CERTAIN PIPELINES- Not later than 18 and the environment and that minimize costs and service disruptions.
months after the date of enactment of this section, each owner or operator `(e) High-consequence Area Defined- In this section, the term `high-consequence
of a pipeline facility shall identify and submit to the Secretary area' means an area described in section 60109(a).'.
documentation relating to each pipeline segment of the owner or operator (b) Clerical Amendment- The analysis for chapter 601 is amended by inserting
described in subsection (a)(1) for which the records of the owner or after the item relating to section 60138 the following:
operator are insufficient to confirm the established maximum allowable `60139. Maximum allowable operating pressure.'.
operating pressure of the segment.
`(2) EXCEEDANCES OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE OPERATING SEC. 24. LIMITATION ON INCORPORATION OF DOCUMENTS BY
PRESSURE- If there is an exceedance of the maximum allowable REFERENCE.
operating pressure with respect to a gas transmission pipeline of an owner
or operator of a pipeline facility that exceeds the build-up allowed for Section 60102, as amended by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end
operation of pressure-limiting or control devices, the owner or operator the following:
shall report the exceedance to the Secretary and appropriate State `(p) Limitation on Incorporation of Documents by Reference- Beginning 1 year
authorities on or before the 5th day following the date on which the after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary may not issue
exceedance occurs. guidance or a regulation pursuant to this chapter that incorporates by reference
`(c) Determination of Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure- any documents or portions thereof unless the documents or portions thereof are
`(1) IN GENERAL- In the case of a transmission line of an owner or made available to the public, free of charge, on an Internet Web site.'.
operator of a pipeline facility identified under subsection (b)(1), the
Secretary shall-- SEC. 25. PIPELINE SAFETY TRAINING FOR STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL.
(a) In General- To further the objectives of chapter 601 of title 49, United States (d) Report- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Code, the Secretary of Transportation may provide the services of personnel from Comptroller General shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and
the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to provide training Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
for State and local government personnel at a pipeline safety training facility that Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of
is established and operated by an agency or instrumentality of the United States, a the Senate a report on the results of the study.
unit of State or local government, or an educational institution.
(b) Reimbursements for Training Expenditures- SEC. 28. COVER OVER BURIED PIPELINES.
(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary may require reimbursement from sources other than the Federal (a) In General- Chapter 601, as amended by this Act, is further amended by
Government for all expenses incurred by the Secretary in providing adding at the end the following:
training for State and local government personnel under subsection (a),
including salaries, expenses, transportation for Pipeline and Hazardous `Sec. 60140. Cover over buried pipelines
Materials Safety Administration personnel, and the cost of training
materials. `(a) Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Incidents Involving Buried Pipelines-
(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- Amounts collected as `(1) STUDY- The Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a study of
reimbursement under paragraph (1) are authorized to be appropriated for hazardous liquid pipeline incidents at crossings of inland bodies of water
the purposes set forth in chapter 601 of title 49, United States Code. with a width of at least 100 feet from high water mark to high water mark
to determine if the depth of cover over the buried pipeline was a factor in
SEC. 26. REPORT ON MINORITY-OWNED, WOMAN-OWNED, AND any accidental release of hazardous liquids.
DISADVANTAGED BUSINESSES. `(2) REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
section, the Secretary shall transmit to the Committee on Transportation
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the
General of the United States, based upon available information, shall submit to House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of the study.
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy `(b) Assessment of Current Requirements for Depth of Cover Over Buried
and Commerce of the House of Representatives a comprehensive report assessing Pipelines-
the levels and types of participation and methods of facilitating the participation `(1) IN GENERAL- If, following completion of the study under
of minority-owned business enterprises, woman-owned business enterprises, and subsection (a), the Secretary finds that the depth of cover over buried
disadvantaged business enterprises in the construction and operation of pipeline pipelines is a contributing factor in the accidental release of hazardous
facilities in the United States. liquids from the pipelines, the Secretary, not later than 1 year after the date
of completion of the study, shall review and determine the sufficiency of
SEC. 27. REPORT ON PIPELINE PROJECTS. current requirements for the depth of cover over buried pipelines.
`(2) LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS-
(a) Study- The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a `(A) DEVELOPMENT- If the Secretary determines under
comprehensive study regarding the process for obtaining Federal and State paragraph (1) that the current requirements for the depth of cover
permits for projects to construct pipeline facilities. over buried pipelines are insufficient, the Secretary shall develop
(b) Evaluation- In conducting the study, the Comptroller General shall evaluate legislative recommendations for improving the safety of buried
how long it takes to issue permits for pipeline construction projects, the pipelines at crossings of inland bodies of water with a width of at
relationship between the States and the Federal Government in issuing such least 100 feet from high water mark to high water mark.
permits, and any recommendations from the States for improving the permitting `(B) CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS- In developing legislative
process. recommendations under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall
(c) Consultation- In conducting the study, the Comptroller General shall consult consider the factors specified in section 60102(b)(2).
with the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on `(C) REPORT TO CONGRESS- If the Secretary develops
Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on legislative recommendations under subparagraph (A), the
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate. Secretary shall submit to the committees referred to in subsection
(a)(2) a report containing the legislative recommendations.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The analysis for chapter 601 is amended by inserting (a) Gas and Hazardous Liquid- Section 60125(a) is amended to read as follows:
after the item relating to section 60139 the following: `(a) Gas and Hazardous Liquid-
`60140. Cover over buried pipelines.'. `(1) IN GENERAL- To carry out the provisions of this chapter related to
gas and hazardous liquid and section 12 of the Pipeline Safety
SEC. 29. SEISMICITY. Improvement Act of 2002 (49 U.S.C. 60101 note; Public Law 107-355),
there is authorized to be appropriated to the Department of Transportation
In identifying and evaluating all potential threats to each pipeline segment for each of fiscal years 2012 through 2015, from fees collected under
pursuant to parts 192 and 195 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, an operator section 60301, $90,679,000, of which $4,746,000 is for carrying out such
of a pipeline facility shall consider the seismicity of the area. section 12 and $36,194,000 is for making grants.
`(2) TRUST FUND AMOUNTS- In addition to the amounts authorized to
SEC. 30. TRIBAL CONSULTATION FOR PIPELINE PROJECTS. be appropriated by paragraph (1), there is authorized to be appropriated for
each of fiscal years 2012 through 2015 from the Oil Spill Liability Trust
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Fund to carry out the provisions of this chapter related to hazardous liquid
Transportation shall develop and implement a protocol for consulting with Indian and section 12 of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (49 U.S.C.
tribes to provide technical assistance for the regulation of pipelines that are under 60101 note; Public Law 107-355), $18,573,000, of which $2,174,000 is
the jurisdiction of Indian tribes. for carrying out such section 12 and $4,558,000 is for making grants.'.
(b) Emergency Response Grants- Section 60125(b)(2) is amended by striking
`2007 through 2010' and inserting `2012 through 2015'.
SEC. 31. PIPELINE INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT NEEDS.
(c) One-Call Notification Programs- Section 6107 is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by striking `2007 through 2010.' and inserting `2012
(a) Inspection and Enforcement Needs- Not later than 12 months after the date of
through 2015.';
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to the
(2) in subsection (b) by striking `2007 through 2010.' and inserting `2012
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy
through 2015.'; and
and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
(3) by striking subsection (c).
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report that provides
(d) State Damage Prevention Programs- Section 60134 is amended by adding at
information on--
the end the following:
(1) the total number of full-time equivalent positions for pipeline
`(i) Authorization of Appropriations- There is authorized to be appropriated to the
inspection and enforcement personnel at the Pipeline and Hazardous
Secretary to provide grants under this section $1,500,000 for each of fiscal years
Materials Safety Administration;
2012 through 2015. Such funds shall remain available until expended.'.
(2) out of the total number of such positions, how many of the positions
(e) Community Pipeline Safety Information Grants- Section 60130 is amended--
are not filled and the reasons why the positions are not filled;
(1) in subsection (a)(1) by striking `$50,000' and inserting `$100,000';
(3) the actions the Administrator of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
(2) in subsection (b)--
Safety Administration is taking to fill the positions; and
(A) by inserting `to grant recipients and their contractors' after `this
(4) any additional inspection and enforcement resource needs of the
section'; and
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
(B) by inserting `, for direct advocacy for or against a pipeline
(b) Staffing- Subject to the availability of funds, the Secretary may increase the
construction or expansion project,' after `for lobbying'; and
number of positions for pipeline inspection and enforcement personnel at the
(3) in subsection (d) by striking `$1,000,000 for each of the fiscal years
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration by 10 full-time
2003 through 2010' and inserting `$1,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2012
equivalent employees, if--
through 2015'.
(1) on or before September 30, 2014, the Secretary fills the 135 full-time
(f) Pipeline Transportation Research and Development- Section 12 of the Pipeline
equivalent positions for pipeline inspection and enforcement personnel
Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (49 U.S.C. 60101 note) is amended--
specified in section 18(e) of the Pipeline Inspection, Protection,
(1) in subsection (d) by adding at the end the following:
Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006 (120 Stat. 3498); and
`(3) ONGOING PIPELINE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND
(2) in preparing the report under subsection (a), the Secretary finds that
DEVELOPMENT-
additional pipeline inspection and enforcement personnel are necessary.
`(A) IN GENERAL- After the initial 5-year program plan has been
carried out by the participating agencies, the Secretary of
SEC. 32. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
Transportation, in coordination with the Director of the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, as appropriate, shall
prepare a research and development program plan every 5 years
thereafter and shall transmit a report to Congress on the status and
results-to-date of implementation of the program every 2 years.
The biennial report shall include a summary of updated research
needs and priorities identified through the consultation
requirements of paragraph (2).
`(B) CONSULTATION- The Secretary shall comply with the
consultation requirements of paragraph (2) when preparing the
program plan and in the selection and prioritization of research and
development projects.
`(C) FUNDING FROM NON-FEDERAL SOURCES- The
Secretary shall ensure at least 30 percent of the costs of program-
wide research and development activities are carried out using
non-Federal sources.'.
(2) in subsection (f) by striking `2003 through 2006.' and inserting `2012
through 2015.'.
Passed the House of Representatives December 14, 2011.
Attest:
Clerk.
112th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. CON. RES. 93
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Providing for a correction to the enrollment of the bill H.R. 2845.
END
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
and
COMMONLY ABBREVIATED ORGANIZATIONS
ABANDONED PIPELINE: A pipeline that is physically separated from its source of gas and is no
longer maintained under 49 CFR Part 192.
ABANDONMENT: The process of abandoning a pipeline.
ACTIVE CORROSION: Continuing corrosion which, unless controlled, could result in a condition
that is detrimental to public safety.
ACTUATOR: A device designed to shut off gas flow upon flame failure, pilot outage, control
impulse, overpressure, or underpressure without a person being physically at the location. Valve
actuators on mainline transmission systems are primary operated by pushing a button at a control
station.
ADHESIVE JOINT: A joint made in plastic piping by the use of an adhesive substance which forms a
bond between the mating surfaces without dissolving either one of them.
ADMINISTRATOR: The Administrator of the Research and Special Programs Administration or any
person to whom authority in the matter concerned has been delegated by the Secretary of
Transportation.
ALTERNATING CURRENT (AC): A current whose direction changes with time (e.g., commercial
electricity used to run home appliances).
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE: The temperature of the surrounding medium, usually used to refer to
the temperature of the air in which a structure is situated or a device operates.
ANHYDROUS AMMONIA: A colorless gas with a pungent suffocating odor. It is shipped as a

compressed gas, which is considered to be a hazardous liquid. Will burn skin if touched and can be
deadly if inhaled.
ANODE: A positive electrode in an electrolytic system, such as applied in cathodic protection; the
electrode at which oxidation or corrosion occurs.
ANODELESS RISER: A steel casing with a plastic pipe inside. The plastic pipe inside the steel
casing is the service line carrying gas to the customer meter.
BALL VALVE: A valve in which a pierced sphere rotates within the valve body to control the flow
of fluids.

BAR HOLE: A small diameter hole made by a plunger bar in the ground along the route of the gas
pipe when searching for gas leaks. (Is a process of checking the sub-surface atmosphere for gas
leaks.)
BARLOW’S FORMULA: See HOOP STRESS.
BELL HOLE: A hole dug along the side of pipelines or in a trench to allow room for workmen to
make a joint in the pipe, repairs to the pipe, welding steel pipe, or replacing pipe. In the broad sense,
any hole, other than a ditch, opened for pipeline work.
BOILING POINT: The temperature at which a liquid changes into a gas or a gas changes into a liquid
(e.g., natural gas boiling point is approximately -260º F).
BOTTLE: A gas tight structure completely fabricated from pipe with integral drawn, forged caps and
tested in the manufacturer’s plant.
BOTTLE-TYPE HOLDER: Any bottle or group of interconnected bottles buried underground in one
location and used for the sole purpose of storing gas. (per ASME Guide)
BRANCH SERVICE LINE: A branch service line can be a main to the branch point (common source
of supply). If the branch point is underground, much of the service line can be a main. If the branch is
aboveground at a bank of meters, all of the service line can be a main, part of which being
aboveground.
BRITISH THERMAL UNIT (BTU): The quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of one
pound of water one degree Fahrenheit. A common unit of measurement for gas prices. See THERM.
BUTT FUSION JOINT: This technique consists of heating the squared ends of matching surfaces by
holding them against a heating plate until fusion temperature is reached, pushing the two softened
ends against one another, holding under pressure for the prescribed manufacture’s time, and allowing
the joint to cool.
BY-PASS TYPE ODORIZER: The equipment in which a portion of the main gas stream is diverted,
by an orifice plate or partially closed valve in the line through a tank provided with baffles or
wicking. The odorant-saturated portion of the by-pass gas is then returned to the stream. Generally
used for low, more uniform flows.
CARBON STEEL: By common custom, steel is considered to be carbon steel when (1) no minimum
content is specified or required for aluminum, boron, chromium, cobalt, columbium, molybdenum,
nickel, titanium, tungsten, vanadium, zirconium, or any other element added to obtain a desired
alloying effect; (2) the specified minimum content does not exceed 1.65 percent for manganese or
0.60 percent for copper. All carbon steels may contain small quantities of unspecified residual
elements unavoidably retained from raw materials. These elements (copper, nickel, molybdenum,
chromium, etc.) are considered incidental and are not normally determined or reported.
CAST IRON: Applies to gray cast iron which is a cast ferrous material in which a major part of the
carbon content occurs as free carbon in the form of flakes interspersed through the metal.

CATHODIC PROTECTION (CP): A cathodic polarization method that is widely and effectively used
to limit corrosion.
CENTERING : The process of approximating a leak location.
COMBUSTIBLE GAS INDICATOR (CGI): Used as a leakage detection instrument for subsurface
and confined area surveys. It is also used to center, pinpoint and classify a gas leak.
COMBUSTION: The process of burning.
COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG): Natural gas stored inside containers at a pressure much
higher than normal air pressure. It is used in vehicles and other applications not attached to a pipeline.
COALESCENCE: Produced by heating with an electric arc or arcs between the bare metal electrode
or electrodes and the work.
CURB VALVE: A valve installed for the purpose of shutting off the gas supply to a building. It is
installed below grade in a service line, at or near the property line. It is operated by use of a
removable key or wrench, through a curb box or standpipe.
CRITICAL BOND: A compensating bond attached between offending pipelines or other metallic
structures to reduce or eliminate stray current interference and whose failure would jeopardize
protection of the structure.
CUSTOMER METER: A device which measures gas delivered to a customer for consumption on the
premises.
CUSTOMER REGULATOR: A device that maintains a set pressure to the customer.
DESTRUCTIVE TESTING: Testing in which the part being tested is rendered unusable to prove the
strength of the part being tested.
DETERMINE: To establish or ascertain definitely after considering an investigation or calculation.
DIRECT CURRENT (DC): The opposite of AC; DC current stays constant over a period of time
(e.g., a flashlight battery).
DIRECT SALES LATERAL (INTRASTATE OR INTERSTATE SALES LATERAL): A pipeline

that transports gas to a large volume customer such as a factory or power plant. This pipeline is
upstream from a distribution center or directly off of a transmission line. This pipeline by definition is
a transmission line and is jurisdictional to the state pipeline safety program if one exist.
DISCOVERY: To gain knowledge of something through: observation, study, or search; to be the first
to find, learn, or observe.
DISTRIBUTION LINE: A pipeline other than a gathering or transmission line.

DOUBLE SUBMERGED ARC WELDED PIPE: A pipe having longitudinal or spiral butt joints. The
joints are produced by at least two passes, including at least one each on the inside and on the outside
of the pipe. The welding is shielded by a blanket or granular, fusible material on the work. Pressure is
not used and filler metal for the inside and outside welds is obtained from the electrode or electrodes.
Typical specifications: ASTM A 381, API 5 L.
DRIP TYPE ODORIZER: Equipment for introducing odorant from a storage tank directly into a gas
stream through gravity flow. The odorant may be regulated by orifice float valves, or rotameters.
DUCTILE IRON (SOMETIMES CALLED NODULAR IRON): A cast ferrous material in which the
free graphite present is in a spherical form rather than a flake form. The desirable properties of ductile
iron are achieved by means of chemistry and a fertilizing heat treatment of the castings.
ELBOW or ELL: A pipe fitting that makes an angle in a pipe run. Unless stated otherwise, the angle
is usually assumed to be 90 degrees. Compare STREET ELL.
ELECTRIC-FLASH-WELDED PIPE: Pipe having a longitudinal butt joint wherein coalescence is

produced, simultaneously over the entire area of abutting surfaces, by the heat obtained from
resistance to the flow of electric current between the two surfaces, and by the application of pressure
after heating is substantially completed. Flashing and upsetting are accompanied by the expulsion of
metal from the joint. Typical specification: API 5L. See PIPE MANUFACTURING PROCESS.
ELECTRIC-FUSION-WELDED PIPE: Pipe having a longitudinal butt joint wherein coalescence is

produced in the performed tube by manual or automatic electric-arc welding. The weld may be single
or double and may be made with or without the use of filler metal. Typical specifications:
ASTM A 134, ASTM A 139: Single or double weld is permitted with or without the
use of filler metal.
ASTM A 671, ASTM A 672, ASTM A 691, and API-5L: Requires both inside and
outside welds and use of filler metal.
Spiral-welded pipe is also made by the electric-fusion-welded process with either a butt joint,
a lap joint or a lock-seam joint. Typical specifications:
ASTM A 134, ASTM A 139, and API 5L: Butt joint.
ASTM A 211: Butt joint, lap joint or lock-seam joint. See PIPE MANUFACTURING PROCESS.
ELECTRIC-RESISTANCE-WELDED PIPE (ERW): Pipe which has a longitudinal butt joint wherein
coalescence is produced by the application of pressure and by the heat obtained from the resistance of
the pipe to the flow of an electric current in a circuit of which the pipe is a part. It is produced in
individual lengths, or in continuous lengths from coiled skelp and subsequently cut into individual
lengths. Typical specifications: ASTM A 53, ASTM A 135, API 5L. See PIPE MANUFACTURING
PROCESS.

EMERGENCY RESPONSE PERSONNEL: Any persons engaged in the response to hazardous
materials emergency, including firefighters, police, civil defense/emergency management officials,
sheriffs, military, manufacturing and transportation personnel.
EXPOSED LINE: A pipeline where the top of the pipe is protruding above the seabed in water less
than 15 feet deep, as measured from the mean low water. EXPLOSIVE: Chemical material that can
undergo a sudden and violent release of pressure and heat.
FLAME IONIZATION (FI): Used as a leakage detection instrument for surface surveys. It indicates
the presence of gas in parts per million (PPM).
FLAMMABLE: A substance that will burn readily or quickly.
FLAMMABLE (EXPLOSIVE) RANGE: The range of a gas or vapor concentration that will burn or
explode if an ignition source is introduced. Limiting concentrations are commonly called the “lower
explosive or flammable limit” (LEL/LFL) and the “upper explosive or flammable limit” (UEL/UFL).
Below the explosive or flammable limit the mixture is too lean to burn and above the upper explosive
or flammable limit is too rich to burn. SEE TABLE ON PHYSICAL PROPERTIES.
FURNACE-LAP-WELDED PIPE: Pipe which has a longitudinal lap joint that is produced by the
forge welding process. In this process, coalescence is produced by heating performed tube to welding
temperature and then passing it over a mandrel. The mandrel is located between the two welding rolls
that compress and weld the overlapping edges. Typical specification: API 5L. See PIPE
MANUFACTURING PROCESS. FUSION: A process of joining plastic pipe with heat. See HEAT
FUSION JOINT.
GAS: Natural gas, flammable gas, or gas which is toxic or corrosive.
GATE STATION: A location at which gas may change ownership from one party to another (e.g.,
from a transmission company to a local distribution company), neither of which is the ultimate
consumer. Purchased for the sole purpose of resale. Also referred to as city gate station, town border
station.
GATE VALVE: A full opening and closing valve depending upon deformation of mating surfaces for
control.
GATHERING LINE: A pipeline that transports gas from a current production facility to a
transmission line or main. The definition of gathering line is based upon a letter written to Dale
Johansen on May 9, 1985. This letter is used as a guideline concerning 4 points where the gathering
line terminates. The gathering line can terminate at any of these points based upon population density,
distance from busy roads or highways, and location concerning environmental sensitive area.
Determination is made on a case-by-case basis.

EMERGENCY RESPONSE PERSONNEL: Any persons engaged in the response to
hazardous materials emergency, including firefighters, police, civil defense/emergency
management officials, sheriffs, military, manufacturing and transportation personnel.
EXPOSED LINE: A pipeline where the top of the pipe is protruding above the seabed in
water less than 15 feet deep, as measured from the mean low water.
EXPLOSIVE: Chemical material that can undergo a sudden and violent release of pressure
and heat.
F
FLAME IONIZATION (FI): Used as a leakage detection instrument for surface surveys. It
indicates the presence of gas in parts per million (PPM).
FLAMMABLE: A substance that will burn readily or quickly.
FLAMMABLE (EXPLOSIVE) RANGE: The range of a gas or vapor concentration that

will burn or explode if an ignition source is introduced. Limiting concentrations are commonly
called the “lower explosive or flammable limit” (LEL/LFL) and the “upper explosive or
flammable limit” (UEL/UFL). Below the explosive or flammable limit the mixture is too lean to
burn and above the upper explosive or flammable limit is too rich to burn.
Physical Properties of
Various Explosive Liquids and Gases
Chemical Specific Ignition Temp LEL UEL
M ATERIAL Formula Gravity Air ºF in Air (% gas) (% gas)
=1
Methane CH4 .55 1193 5.3 15.0
Natural Blend .65 1163 4.5 14.5
Gas
Ethane C2H6 1.04 993-1101 3.0 12.5
Propane C3H8 1.56 957-1090 2.2 9.5
Butane C4H10 2.01 912-1056 1.9 8.5
Hexane C6H14 3.0 437 1.1 7.5
Gasoline Blend 3-4.0 632 1.4 7.6
Acetone C3H6O 2.0 869 2.5 12.8
Benzene C6H6 2.8 928 1.2 7.8
Carbon CO 1.0 1128 12.5 74.0
Monoxide
Hydrogen H2 .1 932 4.0 75.0
Hydrogen H2S 1.2 500 4.0 44.02
GLOBE VALVE: A valve equipped with an orifice and a stem attached to a plug and matching
circular seat. Shut-off is obtained by direct contact of the plug and the seat. Body of valve is normally
spherical.
GROUND TEMPERATURE: The temperature of the earth at pipe depth. See AMBIENT
TEMPERATURE, TEMPERATURE.
GULF OF MEXICO AND ITS INLETS: The waters from the mean high water mark of the coast of
the Gulf of Mexico and its inlets open to the sea (excluding rivers, tidal marshes, lakes, and canals)
seaward to include the territorial sea and Outer Continental Shelf to a depth of 15 feet, as measured
HALF-CELL (REFERENCE ELECTRODE): A device, which usually has copper, immersed in a

copper sulphate solution. The open circuit potential is constant under similar conditions of
measurement. It is used to measure the voltage potential at the junction of the metallic surface and the
electrolyte (pipe surface to soil or seawater) with respect to that of the junction of the copper and the
copper sulphate in the half-cell.
HAZARD TO NAVIGATION: A pipeline where the top of the pipe is less than 12 inches below the
seabed in water less than 15 feet deep, as measured from the mean low water. HEAT FUSION
JOINT: A joint made in thermoplastic piping by heating the parts sufficiently to permit fusion of the
materials when the parts are pressed together.
HIGH PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM: A distribution system in which the gas pressure in
the main is higher than the pressure provided to the customer.
HOLIDAY: A discontinuity or break in the anti-corrosion coating protection on pipe or tubing that
leaves the bare metal exposed to corrosive processes.
HOOP STRESS (Barlow’s Formula): The stress in a pipe wall acting circumferentially in a plane
perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the pipe and produced by the pressure of the fluid in the pipe.
Hoop stress calculation:
S = PD S = hoop stress, in psi 2t P = internal pressure D = outside diameter of the pipe in inches t =
normal wall thickness, in inches
HOT TAP: The process of making branch piping connections to operating pipelines, mains, or other
facilities while in operation. The connection of the branch piping to the operating line and the tapping
of the operating line is done while it is under gas pressure.
HOUSEKEEPING: The administrative control that involves containing and removing chemical
hazards, (e.g., vacuuming, proper storage and handling, prompt removal and correct disposal of
chemical waste).
HYDROCARBON (H.C.) FILTER: A filter used to filter out heavier hydrocarbons when using the
CGI. Gasoline, propane, butane and commercial solvents are good examples of heavier hydrocarbons.

I
IGNITION TEMPERATURE: The minimum temperature required to ignite gas or vapor without a
spark or flame being present. See FLAMMABLE (EXPLOSIVE) RANGE.
INACTIVE PIPELINE: A pipeline that is being maintained under Part 192 but is not presently being
used to transport gas.
INERT GAS: This is commonly referred to as a gas that is non-explosive (non-flammable). The most
commonly used inert gas is nitrogen. Operators use inert gas for testing and purging pipelines.
INJECTOR TYPE ODORIZER: A pump type odorizer. The flow rate of the gas stream is monitored
by an electronic sensor which, in turn, controls the pump speed.
INPATIENT HOSPITALIZATION : Admission and confinement in a hospital beyond treatment

administered in an emergency room or outpatient clinic in which confinement does not occur.
INSTRUMENT PIPING: Pipe, valves and fittings used to connect instruments to main piping, to
other instruments and apparatus, or to measuring equipment.
INTERNAL NIGHT CAP: A plug or cap attached to the open end of a line during construction or
while making repairs during off work periods to keep foreign matter out of the pipe.
IRON: See CAST IRON, DUCTILE IRON.
JOINT : Could mean connection between two lengths of material, such as pipe. Joint can also mean a
piece of pipe (i.e., joint of pipe). See LENGTH.
LARGE VOLUME CUSTOMER: A customer who receives similar volumes of gas as a distribution
center. This may include factories, power plants and institutional users.
LEAKAGE SURVEYS: Systematic inspections made for the purpose of finding leaks in a gas piping
system.
LENGTH: A piece of pipe as delivered from the mill. Each piece is called a length regardless of its
actual dimension. While this is sometimes called "joint", the term "length" is preferred.
LINE SECTION: A continuous run of transmission line between adjacent compressor stations,
between a compressor station and storage facilities, between a compressor station and a block valve,
or between adjacent block valves.
LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS (LPG): A gas containing certain specific hydrocarbons which are
gaseous under normal atmospheric conditions, but can be liquefied under moderate pressure at normal
temperatures. Propane and butane are principal examples.

LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS (LPG)-AIR MIXTURE: Liquefied petroleum gases distributed at
relatively low pressures and normal atmospheric temperatures which have been diluted with air to
produce desired heating value and utilization characteristics.
LISTED SPECIFICATION: A specification listed in section I of Appendix B of 49 CFR Part 192.
LOCAL DISTRIBUTION COMPANY (LDC): Purchases gas for resale.
LOCK-UP or LOCK-OFF: The point at which a regulator or governor shuts off completely.
LONG-TERM HYDROSTATIC STRENGTH OF PLASTIC PIPE: The estimated hoop stress, in psi,
which would result in a failure of the pipe if the pipe were subjected to 100,000 hours of hydrostatic
pressure.
LOW PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM: A distribution system in which the gas pressure in
the main is substantially the same as the pressure provided to the customer. This is restricted to
residential and small commercial service only.
LEL: Lower Explosive Limit is read from the CGI. LEL is the minimum amount of airborne chemical
that must be present in the air-chemical mixture to make it explosive. See FLAMMABLE
(EXPLOSIVE) RANGE.
MAGNESIUM ANODE: See ANODE.
MAIN: A distribution line that serves as a common source of supply for more than one service line.
MALLEABLE IRON: A mixture of iron and carbon, including small amounts of silicon, manganese,
phosphorous and sulphur which, after being cast, is converted structurally by heat treatment into
primarily a matrix of ferrite containing nodules of temper carbon.
MANDREL: A metal bar that serves as a core around which material (as metal) may be cast, molded,
forged, bent, or otherwise shaped.
MANOMETER: A tube in the shape of a U, partially filled with liquid of suitable density. When
points of different pressure are connected to respective ends of the manometer, the liquid is pushed up
in the low-pressure side of the manometer, and the difference in liquid level between the two sides of
the U is an indication of pressure difference. (One side may be open to atmosphere for gauge pressure
measurement.)
MASTER METER SYSTEM: A pipeline system for distributing gas within, but not limited to, a
definable area, such as a mobile home park, housing project, or apartment complex, where the
operator purchases metered gas from an outside source for resale through a gas distribution pipeline
system. The gas distribution pipeline system supplies the ultimate consumer who either purchases the
gas directly through a meter or by other means, such as by rents.
MAXIMUM ACTUAL OPERATING PRESSURE (MOP): The maximum pressure that occurs
during normal operations over a period of 1 year.

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HOOP STRESS: The maximum hoop stress permitted for the design of
a piping system. It depends upon the material used, the location of the pipe and the operating
conditions. See HOOP STRESS.
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE OPERATING PRESSURE (MAOP): The maximum pressure at which a

pipeline or segment of a pipeline may be operated under 49 CFR Part 192.
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TEST PRESSURE: The maximum internal fluid pressure permitted for
testing, for the materials and locations involved.
MCF: One thousand cubic feet.
MERCAPTAN: An organic chemical compound having a distinctive odor used for odorization of gas
streams.
METER SET ASSEMBLY: The piping installed to connect the inlet side of the meter to the gas
service line, and to connect the outlet side of the meter to the customer's fuel line.
METERS: See CUSTOMER METER, METER SET ASSEMBLY.
METHANE: The lightest in the paraffin series of hydrocarbons. It is colorless, odorless and
flammable; it forms the major portion of natural gas, CH4. See FLAMMABLE (EXPLOSIVE)
RANGE.
MITER JOINT: A joint made by cutting the pipe at an angle, then joined together. 49 CFR
192.233 provides guidelines for miter joints in steel pipelines.
MMCF: One million cubic feet.
MONITORING REGULATOR: A pressure regulator, set in series with another pressure regulator,
for the purpose of providing automatic overpressure protection in the event of a malfunction of the
primary regulator.
MUNICIPALITY: A city, county, or any other political subdivision of a State.
NEEDLE VALVE: A small valve that is opened and closed to permit or restrict fluid or gas flow by
the movement of a pointed plug or needle in an orifice or tapered orifice in the valve body.
NODULAR IRON: See DUCTILE IRON.
NOMINAL WALL THICKNESS (t): The wall thickness, in inches, computed by, or used in, the
design formula for steel pipe in 192.105. Pipe may be ordered to this computed wall thickness
without adding an allowance to compensate for the under-thickness tolerances permitted in approved
specifications.
NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING (NDT): Testing in which the part being tested is not rendered
unusable.

O
OODORANT: A substance giving a readily perceptible odor at low concentrations in the material
into which it is mixed, and used as a warning sign of the presence of the gas. See MERCAPTAN.
ODORIZER: A piece of equipment such as wicks, drips, and injector used to odorize gas. See WICK,
DRIP and INJECTOR TYPE ODORIZERS.
OPERATING STRESS: The stress in a pipe or structural member under operating conditions.
OPERATOR: A person who engages in the transportation of gas.
OVERPRESSURE PROTECTION: The use of a device or equipment installed for the purpose of
preventing pressure in a pipe system or other facility from exceeding a predetermined limit. See
PRESSURE LIMITING STATION, PRESSURE REGULATING STATION, PRESSURE RELIEF
STATION, and SERVICE REGULATOR.
PARALLEL ENCROACHMENT: That portion of the route of a transmission line or main which lies
within, runs in a generally parallel direction, and does not necessarily cross, the rights-of-way of a
road, street, highway or railroad.
PARTS PER MILLION (PPM): Parts of the chemical in each one million (1,000,000) parts of the air
chemical mixture. A unit to express exposure limits.
PEAK SHAVING: The use of fuels and equipment to generate additional gas to supplement the
normal supply of pipeline gas during periods of extremely high demand. The use of LNG,
underground storage and pipeline holders are good examples.
PERFORMANCE LANGUAGE: Prescribes a level of safety. It leaves the method or “how to” to the
operator’s discretion. For example, periodic sampling is required to assure the proper concentration
levels.
PERSON: Any individual, firm, joint venture, partnership, corporation, association, State,
municipality, cooperative association, or joint stock association, and including any trustee, receiver,
assignee, or personal representative thereof.
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT: Equipment that protects the individual who wears it by
placing a barrier between that individual and a hazard; includes protective eye wear, face shields and
masks, gloves, boots, hats, clothing, and respirators.
PETROLEUM GAS: Propane, propylene, butane, (normal butane or isobutanes), and butylene
(including isomers), or mixtures composed predominantly of these gases, having a vapor pressure not
exceeding 1434 kPa (208 psig) at 38o C (100o F).
pH: Acidic or basic corrosives are measured to one another by their ability to dissociate in solution.
Those that form the greatest number of hydrogen ions are the strongest acids. Those that form the

hydroxide ion are the most potent bases. The measurement of hydrogen ion concentration in solution
is called the pH; strong acids have low pH values and strong bases have high pH values.
PIG: A device used to clean the internal surface of a pipeline. Pigs are usually barrel shaped, made of
metal, and covered with metal brushes. They may also have rubber or plastic cups and be made
entirely of plastic. They are inserted into the pipeline by means of a device called a pig-trap and
pushed through the line by pressure of flowing fluid or gas. The forward movement of the pig,
together with its rotation, cleans the rust, liquids and other undesired substances from the pipeline;
also called a go-devil. See SMART PIG.
PINPOINTING: The process of locating the exact source of leakage with a minimum of excavation.
PIPE: See DOUBLE-SUBMERGED-ARC-WELD PIPE, ELECTRIC-FLASH-WELD PIPE,

ELECTRIC-FUSION WELDED PIPE, ELECTRIC-RESISTANCE-WELDED PIPE, FURNACE-
LAP-WELDED PIPE, INSTRUMENT PIPING, LENGTH, PIPE CONTAINER, PIPE
MANUFACTURING PROCESS, PIPE-TYPE HOLDER, SAMPLE PIPING, and SEAMLESS PIPE.
PIPE-CONTAINER: A gas-tight structure assembled from pipe and end closures. See also Pipe-type
holder.
PIPE MANUFACTURING PROCESS: Types and names of welded joints are used herein as defined
in the American Welding Society (AWS) Publication A3.0 " Standard Welding Terms and
Definitions” except for the following terms which are defined in this glossary:
Double-submerged-arc-welded pipe Electric-flash-welded pipe Electric-fusion-welded pipe Electric-

resistance-welded pipe Furnace-lap-welded pipe Seamless pipe
PIPE-TYPE HOLDER: Any pipe container or group of interconnected pipe containers installed at one
location and used for the sole purpose of storing gas. (per ASME Guide)
PIPELINE: All parts of those physical facilities through which gas moves in transportation, including
pipe, valves, and other appurtenance attached to pipe, compressor units, metering stations, regulator
stations, delivery stations, holders, and fabricated assemblies.
PIPELINE FACILITY: New and existing pipeline, rights-of-way, and any equipment, facility, or
building used in the transportation of gas or in the treatment of gas during the course of
transportation.
PITOT TUBE: A small device that can be inserted into a pipe to measure the flow of liquid or gas.
This device is composed of two tubes arranged in such a manner that will allow the measurement of
both the velocity and static pressures of the flowing liquid or gas. The difference in these pressures is
a function of the flow within the pipe.
PLASTIC: A material which contains, as an essential ingredient, an organic substance of high

molecular weight. It is solid in its finished state and, at some stage of its manufacture or processing,
can be shaped by flow. The two general types of plastic referred to in this Guide are thermoplastic
and thermosetting. See THERMOPLASTIC PIPE, and THERMOSETTING PLASTIC PIPE.
PLASTIC PIPE JOINTS: See ADHESIVE JOINT, HEAT FUSION JOINT and SOLVENT
CEMENT JOINT.

PLUG VALVE: Metal valve in which a pierced plug rotates in a tapered or cylindrical body to
control flow through the valve.
PLUNGER BAR: A device used to bar holes along the route of a gas pipe when searching for gas for
leaks.
PE: Polyethylene plastic pipe.
PSI: Pounds Per Square Inch.
PSIA: Pounds Per Square Inch Absolute
PSIG: Pounds Per Square Inch Gauge.
PRESSURE: Expressed in pounds per square inch above atmospheric pressure, i.e., gauge, pressure
(abbreviation-p.s.i.g, unless otherwise stated). See MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TEST PRESSURE,
OVERPRESSURE PROTECTION, PRESSURE LIMITING STATION, PRESSURE
REGULATING STATION, PRESSURE RELIEF STATION, and STANDUP PRESSURE TEST.
PRESSURE LIMITING STATION: Consists of apparatus which, under abnormal conditions, will act
to reduce, restrict or shut off the supply of gas flowing into a transmission line, main, holder, pressure
vessel or compressor station piping in order to prevent the gas pressure from exceeding a
predetermined limit. While normal pressure conditions prevail, the pressure limiting station may
exercise some degree of control of the flow of gas or may remain in the wide open position. Included
in the station are any enclosures and ventilating equipment, and any piping and auxiliary equipment
(such as valves, control instruments or control lines).
PRESSURE REGULATING STATION: Consists of apparatus installed for the purpose of

automatically reducing and regulating the gas pressure in the downstream transmission line, main,
holder, pressure vessel or compressor station piping to which it is connected. Included in the station
are any enclosures and ventilating equipment, and any piping and auxiliary equipment (such as
valves, control instruments or control lines).
PRESSURE RELIEF STATION: Consists of apparatus installed to vent gas from a transmission line,
main, holder, pressure vessel, or compressor station piping in order to prevent the gas pressure from
exceeding a predetermined limit. The gas may be vented into the atmosphere or into a lower pressure
gas system capable of safely receiving the gas being discharged. Included in the station are any
enclosures and ventilating equipment, and any piping and auxiliary equipment (such as valves,
control instruments or control lines).
PRIVATE RIGHT-OF-WAY: Those that are not located on roads, streets or highways used by the
public, nor on railroad rights-of-way.
PROPRIETARY ITEMS: Items made by a company having the exclusive right of manufacture.
PURGING: The act of replacing the atmosphere within a container by an inert substance in such a
manner as to prevent the formation of explosive mixtures. Commonly used inert substance includes
Nitrogen (N) or Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Also, the act of replacing the inert substance with gas before
putting the line into service.

Q
QUALIFIED WELDER: A welder who has demonstrated the ability to produce welds meeting the
requirements of an appropriate standard.
QUALIFIED WELDING PROCEDURE: A tested and detailed method by which sound welds can be
produced.
RECTIFIER: A device for converting alternating current to direct current, used in the gas industry for
external corrosion control of pipe and other metals.
REGULATOR STATION/DISTRICT: Equipment installed for the purpose of automatically reducing

and regulating the pressure in the downstream pipeline or main to which it is connected. Included are
piping and auxiliary devices such as valves, control instruments, control lines, the enclosure, and
ventilation equipment.
REGULATORS: See PRESSURE LIMITING STATION, PRESSURE REGULATING STATION,

PRESSURE RELIEF STATION, and SERVICE REGULATOR.
RELIEF VALVE: A automatic valve designed to discharge when a preset pressure and/or
temperature condition is reached.
RISER : A general term for vertical runs of gas piping. See ANODELESS RAISER.
RUPTURE: A violent, rapid bursting open of a container, such as a pipelines.
SAMPLE PIPING: Pipe, valves and fittings used for the collection of samples of gas or other fluids.
SEAMLESS PIPE: A wrought tubular product made without a welded seam. It is manufactured by
hot working steel or, if necessary, by subsequently cold finishing the hot-worked tubular product to
produce the desired shape, dimensions and properties. See PIPE MANUFACTURING PROCESS.
SECONDARY STRESS: Stress created in the pipe wall by loads other than internal fluid pressure.
Examples are backfill loads, traffic loads, beam action in a span and loads at supports and at
connections to the pipe.
SERVICE LINE: A distribution line that transports gas from a common source of supply to
(a) a customer meter or the connection to a customer's piping, whichever is farther downstream, or (b)
the connection to a customer's piping if there is no customer meter. A customer meter is the meter
that measures the transfer of gas from an operator to a consumer.
SERVICE REGULATOR: A device installed on a gas service line to control the pressure of the gas
delivered to the customer.

SERVICE TEE: A tee in a customer’s service piping with one leg closed and used for access to the
service pipe in case of plugging with solids. Also, a tee used for making a hot tap on a main to supply
a service.
SHADING: The placing of sand-like material free of any hard objects (rocks, etc.) below, around, and
above the pipe.
SHUT IN TEST: After assembly, the piping industry practice is to admit full container pressure to the
system and check all connections for leaks with a soap or leak-testing solution.
SMART PIG: An instrumented inspection device or internal inspection pig. These pigs can detect
certain irregularities or anomalies in the pipe wall. This type of pig records the existence, location,
and relative severity of the anomalies through use of recording equipment carried on board the pig.
The pig can later be recovered and any external anomalies can be examined visually to verify their
existence and severity.
SOLVENT CEMENT JOINT: A joint made in thermoplastic piping by the use of a solvent or solvent
cement which forms a continuous bond between the mating surfaces.
SPECIFIC ACTION LANGUAGE: A detailed and exact statement prescribing materials, dimensions,
and workmanship for something being built, installed or manufactured. For example, plastic pipe
used for distribution systems must meet ASTM D 2513.
SPECIFIC GRAVITY: Physical data that describes whether a liquid is lighter or heavier than water.
For natural gas, whether it is lighter or heavier than air.
SPECIFIED MINIMUM YIELD STRENGTH (SMYS):
(a) For steel pipe manufactured in accordance with a listed specification, the yield strength specified
as a minimum in that specification; or
(b) For steel pipe manufactured in accordance with an unknown or unlisted specification, the yield
strength determined in accordance with §192.107(b).
SQUEEZE OFF TOOL: Consists of curved surfaces with minimum radii that come together against
the pipe wall. Stops, used to prevent the pipe being squeezed beyond a minimum allowable distance
specified by the pipe manufacture, are normally an integral part of the tool.
STANDARD CUBIC FEET PER HOUR: SCFH.
STANDUP PRESSURE TEST: A test to demonstrate that a pipe or piping system does not leak as
evidenced by the lack of a drop in pressure over a specified period of time after the source of pressure
has been isolated.
STEEL: An iron-base alloy, malleable in some temperature range as initially cast, containing
manganese, carbon and often other alloying elements. See CARBON STEEL.
STOPCOCK (ALSO CALLED A SERVICE LINE VALVE): A valve located in the service line
ahead of the service regulator, or ahead of the meter when there is no regulator.

STREET ELL: An L-shaped pipe fitting with external threads on one end and internal threads on the
other end. Compare ELL.
STREET TEE: A tee with external threads on one of the run connections and with internal threads on
the opposite run connection and the side outlet.
STRESS: The resultant internal force that resists change in the size or shape of a body acted on by
external forces. See HOOP STRESS, MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HOOP STRESS, OPERATING
STRESS, SECONDARY STRESS, TENSILE STRENGTH, and YIELD STRENGTH.
TAPPING TEE: A tee used to connect a service line to a main. Includes a cutter to tap main.
TEMPERATURE: The degree of “hotness” or “coldness” as measured on a definite scale. Is

expressed in degrees Fahrenheit (F) unless otherwise stated. See AMBIENT TEMPERATURE and
GROUND TEMPERATURE.
TENSILE STRENGTH: The highest unit tensile stress (referred to the original cross section) that a
material can sustain before failure.
THERM: 100,000 Btu’s - a common unit for the sale of natural gas.
THERMOPLASTIC PIPE: A plastic pipe which is capable of being repeatedly softened by increase
of temperature and hardened by decrease of temperature. Theses would include Polybutylene (PB),
Polyethylene (PE), and Polyvinylchloride (PVC).
THERMOSETTING PLASTIC PIPE: A plastic pipe which is capable of being changed into a
substantially infusible or insoluble product when cured under application of heat or chemical means.
Reinforced fiberglass is a good example.
THICKNESS. See NOMINAL WALL THICKNESS .
TRACER WIRE: Wire that is buried along with the plastic pipe. The typical gage of wire that is used
is 12. A pipe locator can then detect the buried metallic wire and the adjacent plastic pipe.
TRANSMISSION LINE: A pipeline, other than a gathering line, that:
(a) Transports gas from a gathering line or storage facility to a distribution center, storage facility, or
large volume customer that is not downstream from a distribution center;
(b) Operates at a hoop stress of 20 percent or more of SMYS; or
(c) Transports gas within a storage field.
A large volume customer may receive similar volumes of gas as a distribution center, and includes
factories, power plants, and institutional users of gas.
TRANSPORTATION OF GAS: The gathering, transmission, or distribution of gas by pipeline or the

storage of gas, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce.

TRENCH: A long cut in the ground which is achieved by hand or by machine such as a trencher.
Installation of transmission, mains, or service pipelines, regardless of the kind of pipe may be
accomplished by trenching.
UNACCOUNTED FOR GAS: The difference between the total gas purchases available from all
sources and the total gas accounted for as sales, net interchange, and company use. This difference
includes leakage or other actual losses, discrepancies due to meter inaccuracies, variations of
temperature and/or pressure, and other variants, particularly billing lag.
UNDERGROUND STORAGE: The utilization of subsurface facilities for storing gas which has been
transferred from its original location for the primary purposes of conservation, fuller utilization of
pipeline facilities. These are usually natural geological reservoirs such as depleted oil or gas fields or
water-bearing sands sealed on the top by an impermeable cap rock. The facilities may be manmade or
natural caverns.
UNION: A threaded fitting used to couple two runs of pipe together without having to turn or
dismantle either run of pipe.
PPER EXPLOSIVE LIMITS (UEL): Read from the CGI. UEL is the maximum amount of airborne
chemical that can be present in an air-chemical mixture and still have it be explosive. See
FLAMMABLE (EXPLOSIVE) RANGE.
VALVE: A mechanical device for controlling the flow of fluids; types such as gate, ball, globe,
needle and plug valves are used.
VALVE BOX: A housing around an underground valve to allow access to the valve for operation and
to protect the valve from mechanical damage or the effects of weather.
WELDING PROCESS: A grouping of methods by which metals are welded. Examples of processes
are: submerged metal arc welding, oxyacetylene welding, resistance welding.
WET GAS: Natural gas containing liquefiable hydrocarbons. Natural gasoline, butane, pentane and
other light hydrocarbons can be removed by chilling and pressure or by extraction. It also refers to
gas that has water in excess of 7 lbs per million cubic feet (Mmcf).
WICK TYPE ODORIZER: A piece of equipment which odorizes the gas by having natural gas flow
across a wick saturated with odorant. Generally used for individual odorized lines such as farm taps.
YIELD STRENGTH: The stress at which a material exceeds its elastic limits and the material begins
to deform permanently.

COMMONLY ABBREVIATED ORGANIZATIONS
AGA: American Gas Association

ANSI: American National Standards Institute, formerly the United States of America
Standards Institute (USASI). All current standards issued by USASI and American Standards
Association (ASA) have been re-designated as American National Standards and continue in
effect.
API: American Petroleum Institute
ASME: American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASTM: American Society for Testing and Materials
DOT:: U.S. Department of Transportation
FERC: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
GPTC: Gas Piping Technology Committee
INGA: Interstate Natural Gas Association
ISO: International Standard Organization
MSS: Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry
NACE: National Association of Corrosion Engineers
NAPSR: National Association Pipeline Safety Representatives
NARUC: National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners
NFPA: National Fire Protection Association
NPRM: Notice of Proposed Rule Making
NPGA: National Propane Gas Association
NRC: National Response Center. Serves as notification center for pollution incidents
in US waters and gas incidents as defined in 49 CFR 191.3. Located at US
Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, DC. The NRC relays reports to
appropriate regional authorities for response actions.
NTSB: National Transportation Safety Board
OPS: Office of Pipeline Safety, a federal agency under RSPA
OSHA: Occupational Safety and Health Administration
RSPA: Research and Special Programs Administration. This is the Federal agency in
DOT which is responsible for development and enforcement of the pipeline
safety code.
Agencies/Organizations
AGA American Gas Association.

ANSI American National Standards Institute, formerly the United States of America
Standards Institute (USASI). All current standards issued by USASI and
American Standard Association (ASA) have been redesignated as American
National Standards Institute and continue in effect.
APGA American Public Gas Association.
API American Petroleum Institute.
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials.
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation.
GPTC Gas Piping Technology Committee.
INGAA Interstate Natural Gas Association of America.
MEA Midwest Energy Association.
MSS Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry.
NACE National Association of Corrosion Engineers. (NACE International)
NFPA National Fire Protection Association.
OPS Office of Pipeline Safety. The pipeline safety division of the DOT’s Research and
Special Programs Administration. For addresses of OPS regional offices, see the
attached list of agencies and organizations.
RSPA Research and Special Programs Administration. A major subdivision of the DOT,
it includes the Office of Pipeline Safety. For addresses of regional offices, see the
enclosed handout.
SGA Southern Gas Association.
Pipeline Safety Compliance Test
How well do you know the

regulations?
What is the maximum time limit

to report safety related
conditions?
• 2 weeks
• 10 days
• 10 working days
• 30 days
1
How quickly must an incident be
reported
• Within 5 working days

• Before the end of the following day
• Within 2 hours of discovery
• When certified by regulatory personnel
Several regulations require

inspections once each calendar
year, with intervals not to exceed
15 months. Which inspection
cycle is out of compliance?
• December 14, 2003 and January 14, 2005
• January 14, 2003 and January 14, 2004
• October 14, 2003 and December 14, 2004
• October 14, 2003 and September 14, 2004
2
Unodorized Class 3 pipelines
must be leak surveyed:
• Once each calendar year, not to exceed 15

months.
• Twice each calendar year at intervals not
exceeding 7-1/2 months.
• Annually
• Class 3 lines are exempt from leak survey.
Pipeline patrols can be done by:
• Flying
• Driving
• Walking
• All of these methods
3
The Maximun Allowable
Operating Pressure of a pipeline
may be exceeded:
• For a period of 48 hours in case of

emergency.
• May never be exceeded.
• By a maximum of 20% when needed.
• During testing of relief valves.
An anomalous condition is discovered during

an integrity assessment on a liquid pipeline.
What is the maximum length of time an
operator can reduce the pressure without
taking remedial action to ensure the safety of
the pipeline?
• 180 days.
• 365 days.
• 90 days if the pipeline is in a High
Consequence Area.
• No time limit if operator maintains weekly
patrols of the pipeline.
4
Prompt remediation, when
considering cathodic protection
systems, means:
• Correction completed by the time of the
next scheduled monitoring
• Within 30 calendar days
• Correction is completed as soon as possible
• Within 10 working days, not including
Saturday, Sunday or Federal holidays.
Continuing Surveillance means to

“determine and take appropriate
action” regarding:
• Changes in class location

• Failures
• Leakage history
• All of these situations
5
Which of the following is the
main component to prove
regulatory compliance?
• No corrosion leaks.
• Recordkeeping.
• Inspections by the Corporation
Commission.
• Annual reports submitted to the Office of
Pipeline Safety.
Gathering lines can be required

to comply with pipeline safety
regulations.
• True
• False
6
When a buried pipeline is
exposed, the exposed portion
must be examined for external
corrosion.
• True
• False
Above ground piping is not

allowed to be rusty.
• True
• False
7
Pipeline regulations require that
all leaks be repaired
immediately.
• True
• False
In emergency situations it is
acceptable to install untested
pipe.
• True
• False
8
Whenever a valve is found to be
inoperable operators must take
prompt remedial action or
designate an alternate valve.
• True
• False
All gas pipelines must be

odorized.
• True
• False
9
Line markers must be placed and
maintained over buried pipelines
at each crossing of a railroad.
• True
• False
Discovery of a condition occurs when an

operator has adequate information about the
condition to determine that the condition
presents a potential threat to the integrity of
the hazardous liquid pipeline. Operators must
obtain sufficient information about a
condition to make that determination within
90 days.
• True
• False
10
A “distribution line” cannot be a
transmission line.
• True
• False
While constructing a new pipeline

the line is pressure tested with air.
The line fails and a construction
worker is seriously injured. This is
considered a “reportable incident”.
• True
• False
11
Emergency valves on hazardous
liquid pipelines must be partially
operated during their inspection.
• True
• False
Surface conditions on or adjacent to

each hazardous liquid pipeline
right-of-way must be inspected
every 2 weeks, up to 24 times per
year.
• True
• False
12
When determining MAOP or
MOP, test pressure is the most
important factor.
• True
• False
No operator may permit the pressure in a

hazardous liquid pipeline during surges
or other variations from normal
operations to exceed 110 percent of the
established operating pressure limit.
• True
• False
13
WinD.O.T.
The Pipeline Safety Encyclopedia

from
ViaData LP
WinD.O.T.
• Federal regulations 49 CFR Parts 190-199
and Part 40
– Over 1000 OPS interpretations linked with the
codes
– Links to amendments in each code section
– Gas + Interpretations Module includes the
GPTC Guide for Gas Transmission and
• All state regulations
1
WinD.O.T.
• Rapid Update Service

– E-mail notification of changes to regulations
– Items of interest to pipeline industry
• Complete historical reference
– Complete dockets on rule makings back to
1969
– Dockets include ANPRM, NPRM, Final Rules
WinD.O.T.
• Advisory Bulletins
• Alert Notices
• Compliance actions sorted by region or
code section
• Full text search of all regulations
• Cut and paste capability
2
WinD.O.T.
• Over 35 standards available from
– AGA
– ASME
– ASTM
– API
– NACE
– NFPA
• Canadian and Mexican regulations as well
WinD.O.T.
• OPS Natural Gas and LP Gas Guides for

Small Operators
• Current National Fuel Gas Code NFPA 54
• APWA One Call Directory
• Complete Docket History and Laws

DOT Regulations Feb2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DOT Regulations Feb2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DOT Pipeline Safety Regulations - Guidelines for

Copyright © 2013 Clarion Technical Conferences, George C. Williamson, and

February 11-12, 2013

DAY 1 morning (8am – noon)

1. Regulatory Overview (DB)

Pipeline Safety Acts (DB)

Regulatory Structure (DB)

2. Applicability of the Regulations (DB)

3. Class Locations (DB)

4. MAOP, MOP, and OP Determination for Steel Pipelines

DAY 1 afternoon (1-5pm)

6. Integrity Management (GW)

DAY 2 morning (8am – noon)

7. Enforcement Process (DB)

8. Testing Requirements: New, Replaced or Relocated Pipelines

9. Routine Operation and Maintenance Provisions

10. Common Compliance Requirements for Damage Prevention, Operator Qualification,

11. Control Room Management

12. Reporting Requirements (DB)

DAY 2 afternoon (1-5pm)

12. Reporting Requirements – continued (DB)

14. Interpretations and notes (DB)

16. Pipeline Safety Laws (DB)

George Williamson has 25 years of Operations, Maintenance and Integrity Management

Overview and Guidelines

George Williamson, P.E.

David Bull, ViaData LP

Did you bring a question to the course?

Questions that can’t be answered

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

Gas/Liquid Code Cross Reference

§191.5 What to report

§§ 192.7 and 195.2

Subparts in 49 CFR 192

Subparts in 49 CFR 192

Once Each Calendar Year,

Oct Nov Dec Jan

Maximum Actual Operating

(Part 192 definition only)

SERV I CE- 1/4

Operator Responsibility - Service Line

Owned by Distribution Company

SERV ICE- 2/4

Local Distribution Company

Owned by Distribution Company

Gathering Line Regulations

Production, Single Phase

Commingling, < than 50 Miles

§192.8(b) Regulated Lines

§192.8(b) Regulated Lines

§ 192.9(d) Type B lines,

Sec. 192.13 What general

§192.619 Maximum allowable