P-93-2W, #2

DEPARTMENT OF erating at 40 percent or more of specified March 15, 1993). The waiver was subject TRANSPORTATION minimum yield strength (SMYS). The op- to the conditions that Panhandle: (1) In- erators requested the waiver to get permis- stall the wrap using the procedures de- Research and Special Programs Ad- sion to repair the lines with Clock scribed in documents supporting its peti- ministration Spring® wrap.2 The request came in a tion; (2) perform the inspections described November 22, 1993, petition submitted by in its petition;5 (3) promptly report to [Docket No. P-93-2W; Notice 2] the Interstate Natural Gas Association of RSPA the results of the inspections and America (INGAA), a gas pipeline trade any unfavorable performance of the wrap, Grant of Waiver: Repair of Gas Transmis- association.3 and (4) determine and report to RSPA the sion Lines cause of any unfavorable performance. In Under §192.713(a), each imperfec- addition, Panhandle advised that it would Summary. The Research and Special tion or damage that impairs the service- determine the need to repair generally cor- Programs Administration (RSPA) waives ability of a segment of transmission line roded areas by using ASME B31G, certain maintenance regulations to permit operating at 40 percent or more of SMYS ``Manual for Determining the Remaining various gas pipeline operators to repair must be repaired. If it is feasible to re- Strength of Corroded Pipelines.'' Also, steel transmission lines with Clock move the line from service, pipe contain- Panhandle said it would determine Spring® wrap. The waiver, which is sub- ing the imperfection or damage must be whether Clock Spring® wrap would pro- ject to conditions and future performance replaced. Otherwise, a full encirclement vide a reliable repair in particular in- evaluations, advances the use of new welded split sleeve must be installed over stances by using a computer program de- technology. the imperfection or damage. The waiver veloped by the Gas Research Institute request asks permission to use Clock (GRI) based on laboratory and field tests Background. Twenty-eight compa- Spring® wrap for repairs instead of the of pipe repaired with the wrap. nies and their subsidiaries,1 all gas pipe- methods prescribed by §192.713(a). line operators, requested that RSPA waive In the present waiver request, the op- the safety standards in 49 CFR 192.713(a) Section 192.485(a) requires replace- erators offered to conform to the Panhan- and 192.485 for gas transmission lines op- ment of transmission line pipe that is gen- dle waiver, except that they would: (1) erally corroded to the extent that wall Use an enhanced program, GRI WRAP, to thickness is unsafe, unless operating pres- determine whether Clock Spring® wrap 1 ANR Pipeline Co.; Arkla Energy Resources sure is reduced appropriately or, if the would provide a reliable repair in particu- Co. (including Mississippi River Transmission area of general corrosion is small, the cor- lar instances; (2) use either the ASME Co.); CNG Transmission Corp.; Colorado Inter- roded pipe is repaired. A similar require- B31G procedure or RSTRENG6 to deter- state Gas Co. (including Wyoming Interstate ment applies under §192.485(b) to trans- mine if corroded areas require repair un- Co., Ltd. and Young Gas Storage Co., LTD.); mission lines with unsafe localized corro- der §192.485; (3) coordinate Clock Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.; Columbia Gulf Transmission Co.; El Paso Natural Gas sion pitting, except that repair is not lim- Spring® wrap installations with GRI (to Co.; Enron Corp. (including Florida Gas ited to small areas. The waiver request establish a representative data base to Transmission Co., Houston Pipe Line Co., In- asks permission to use Clock Spring® support a possible rule change), and tratex Gas Company, Northern Border Pipeline wrap to repair large areas of general cor- within 2 years, with GRI's assistance, ex- Co., Northern Natural Gas Company, Oasis rosion as an alternative to pipe replace- cavate and evaluate a statistical sampling Pipeline Co., and Transwestern Pipeline Co.); ment or pressure reduction under of sites,7 record the results, and give the Granite State Gas Transmission Company; §192.485(a).4 results to RSPA upon request; (4) report Great Lakes Gas Transmission Co.; Kern River Clock Spring® wrap repairs to RSPA or Gas Transmission Co.; KN Energy, Inc.; Koch Industries, Inc. and all subsidiaries; Michigan In an earlier waiver of §192.713(a), its state agent within 30 days of repair; (5) Consolidated Gas Co.; Mid Louisiana Gas Co.; RSPA allowed Panhandle Eastern Corpo- Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America and ration (Panhandle) to use Clock Spring® 5 all subsidiaries; Michigan Consolidated Gas wrap to repair six locations on its Line # 2 The inspections include examination and Co.; Mid Louisiana Gas Co.; Natural Gas Pipe- in Fayette County, Ohio (58 FR 13823; measurement of Clock Spring® wrap repairs line Company of America and all subsidiaries; and samples of wrap buried next to the repairs. Northwest Pipeline Corp.; Pacific Gas & Elec- Two repairs are to be evaluated at intervals of 2, tric Co.; Pacific Gas Transmission Co.; Pan- 4, and 8 years. Measurements include strain 2 handle Eastern Corp. (including Panhandle Clock Spring® wrap, manufactured by the gage readings of two repairs at 6-month inter- Eastern Pipeline Co., Texas Eastern Transmis- Clock Spring Company of North America, is a vals to verify the absence of wrap and adhesive sion Co., Trunkline Gas Co., and Algonquin composite material of polyester resin reinforced creep. by glass filament. On installation, it is tightly Gas Transmission Co.); Questar Pipeline Co.; 6 RSTRENG is a computer program developed Southern California Gas Co.; Southern Natural wound and adhesively bonded to damaged pipe. to carry out the procedure called ``A Modified Gas (including Southern Natural Gas Co., 3 By letter dated March 22, 1994, INGAA Criterion for Evaluating the Remaining South Georgia Natural Gas Co., Sea Robin added Granite State Gas Transmission Com- Strength of Corroded Pipe.'' This procedure was Pipeline Co., Sonat Intrastate-Alabama Inc., pany to the original list of companies seeking a developed by Battelle for the American GAs and Bear Creek Storage Co.); Tenneco Gas waiver. Association as an alternative to the ASME Transportation Co. (including Tennessee Gas 4 Section 192.485(a) does not preclude the use B31G procedures. Both B31G and RSTRENG Pipeline Co, East Tennessee Natural Gas Co., of Clock Spring® wrap to repair small areas of may be used to comply with §192.485. Midwestern Gas Transmission Co., and Chan- general corrosion, nor does §192.485(b) pre- 7 nel Gas Transmission Co.); Texas Gas Trans- clude the use of Clock Spring® wrap to repair The INGAA petition defined a site to include mission Corp.; Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line localized corrosion pitting. However, if these multiple repairs on a single pipeline in the same Corp.; Williams Natural Gas Co.; and Williston defects are on transmission lines operating at 40 area or multiple pipelines in the same right-of- Basin Interstate Pipeline Co. percent or more of SMYS, §192.713(a) pre- way in the same area. cludes their repair with Clock Spring® wrap.

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 1995 Pages10630 - 10632 1/3 P-93-2W, #2 P-93-2W, #2

use personnel to install Clock Spring® Reporting Repairs. INGAA, Enron, Our concern about Clock Spring® wrap who have been trained and certified Natural, and Panhandle advised that 30 wrap installers is that they be qualified. by Clock Spring Company; and (6) record days' advance notification would not be in The suggestion that persons who have re- installations of Clock Spring® wrap under the public interest when repairs are ceived initial training and certification §192.709.8 needed quickly. Coastal wanted RSPA to from the Clock Spring Company be al- accept the original proposal to report lowed to train and certify others is reason- Comments on Proposed Waiver/ In Clock Spring® wrap repairs within 30 able and would satisfy this concern. As Notice 1 of this proceeding (59 FR 49739; days after installation. INGAA and Natu- for refresher training, installers would be September 29, 1994), RSPA proposed to ral suggested the waiver allow operators subject to the refresher training require- grant the present waiver request for the to give notice when they decide to use ments of the proposed qualification rules. safety and economic reasons stated in the Clock Spring® wrap to repair a damaged Because we probably will issue final notice. However, we proposed to restrict pipeline. The operators, said INGAA, qualification rules before installers need the waiver to repairs no more than 10 feet Coastal, and Natural, should then be al- refresher training, it is not now necessary long. We felt this restriction was needed lowed to proceed immediately with re- to make refresher training part of this because the pipeline industry has had no pairs, unless, INGAA and Natural said, waiver. However, when we consider the experience in repairing large areas of gen- the appropriate agency tells the operator it performance evaluations of Clock erally corroded pipe other than by pipe wants to view the installation. Panhandle Spring® wrap, we will reexamine the re- replacement. At the same time, we spe- opposed this latter condition because it fresher training issue if final qualification cifically requested comments on the as- would make pipeline maintenance subject rules have not been published. pect of the waiver request that would al- to agency schedules. low unlimited areas of general corrosion Waiver Termination. Enron asked us to be repaired with Clock Spring® wrap. Given the importance of repairing not to include a termination date in the In addition, regarding the offer to report unsafe conditions as soon as practicable, waiver. Instead, Enron recommended the Clock Spring® wrap repairs, we proposed requiring notification of Clock Spring® waiver remain in effect until it is revoked that reports be sent both to RSPA and to wrap repairs at least 30 days beforehand or becomes unnecessary because of a the state agent. We also proposed that the could discourage use of the wrap. Al- change in the regulations. Southern ad- reports be sent [[Page 10631]] before the though we agree operators should not vised the waiver should be extended after time of installation to give RSPA or the have to conform their repair plans to gov- 3 years if the performance evaluations are state agent a chance to inspect the installa- ernment work schedules, RSPA or state favorable. tion process. As to the offer concerning agents need some period of advance noti- personnel qualification, we proposed that fication to prepare to inspect wrap instal- By saying we would consider termi- initial training and certification be sup- lations. Therefore, as a condition of the nating the waiver within 3 years after it is plemented by periodic refresher training waiver, we are requiring that operators re- granted, we meant the waiver might be and recertification. Finally, we said we port scheduled Clock Spring® wrap re- revoked after 3 years if the performance would review the performance evaluations pairs a reasonable time in advance of in- of Clock Spring® wrap repairs is gener- of Clock Spring® wrap repairs, and con- stallation to allow for government inspec- ally unfavorable. We did not intend for sider terminating the waiver 3 years after tion. Under this condition, which does not the waiver to last only 3 years. If the ini- it is granted. apply to emergency installations, deciding tial evaluations are favorable, the waiver when to install Clock Spring® wrap after would continue in effect, unless new in- RSPA received written comments on giving notice must take into account the formation causes us to revoke the waiver the proposed waiver from eight entities: reasonable travel time of government in- or a rule change makes the waiver no INGAA, Enron Operations Corp. (Enron), spectors. But operators would not have to longer necessary. Southern Natural Gas (Southern), Coastal delay installation to conform to govern- Corporation (Coastal), Bay State Gas ment work schedules apart from reason- Repair Length. Southern requested Company (Bay State), Columbia Gas able travel time. that we clarify that the proposed 10-foot Transmission Corporation, Natural Gas restriction applies to corroded pipe under Pipeline Company of America (Natural), Personnel Training. INGAA, Coastal, §192.485(a), and not to imperfections or and Panhandle. The comments are dis- and Natural suggested the waiver allow damage under §192.713(a). Coastal asked cussed below according to the issues pre- installation personnel who have been that we eliminate the proposed restriction sented. All the commenters supported the trained and certified by the Clock Spring entirely, saying there is no practical limit proposed waiver, although some com- Company to train and certify other per- to repairs using Clock Spring® wrap. Bay menters requested changes in the pro- sonnel. Also, INGAA suggested refresher State said the 10-foot limit was arbitrary, posed conditions under which the waiver training and recertification should be re- since Clock Spring® wrap has been could be applied. quired only for personnel who infre- shown to be an effective alternative to quently install Clock Spring® wrap. En- pipe replacement. Panhandle felt the 10- ron recommended that certified installers foot limit was unnecessary and artificial. maintain their qualifications under 8 RSPA's proposed qualification of person- Section 192.709 requires pipeline operators nel rules.9 to keep a record of each repair to a transmission line for as long as the line is in service. This re- response functions regulated under 49 CFR Part quirement applies to all transmission line re- 192 or 195 (59 FR 39506; Aug. 3, 1994). To pairs, and would apply to Clock Spring® wrap 9 RSPA proposed qualification standards for maintain qualifications, refresher training was repairs regardless of the offer to comply with persons who perform, or supervise the perform- proposed to occur at 24-month intervals after the regulation. ance of, operation, maintenance, or emergency- certification.

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 1995 Pages10630 - 10632 2/3 P-93-2W, #2 P-93-2W, #2

As stated above, RSPA specifically (1) Clock Spring® wrap must be in- asked for comments on the merits of al- stalled using procedures recommended by lowing unlimited areas of general corro- the manufacturer; sion to be repaired with Clock Spring® wrap. None of the commenters expressed (2) Clock Spring® wrap must be in- concern about the safety of using Clock stalled consistent with the program, GRI Spring® wrap beyond the 10- WRAP; foot range. Indeed, a few commenters pointed out there is no engineering basis (3) Clock Spring® wrap must be in- for imposing a 10-foot limit. Accordingly, stalled consistent with a GRI plan, includ- in the absence of an engineering basis, ing, at 2-year intervals, excavating and and considering the sound GRI test results evaluating a statistical sample of sites, re- and the plans to evaluate Clock Spring® cording the results, and sending the results wrap installations, we believe the waiver to RSPA; may be applied safely without a limit on the length of repair. (4) To allow inspection by RSPA and state agencies serving as interstate en- Role of GRI. Panhandle requested forcement agents, scheduled non- clarification of GRI's role in carrying out emergency installations of Clock Spring® the waiver. The operator did not welcome wrap must be reported (by phone, fax, or assistance from GRI in any capacity other mail) a reasonable time before installation than as a record keeper. to the RSPA pipeline regional office and state agent with authority over the repair; Because Clock Spring® wrap is new and technology, a major purpose of this waiver is to provide an opportunity to (5) Persons installing Clock Spring® evaluate the performance of the wrap un- wrap must have been trained and certified der various operating conditions. Long in installation procedures either by the range, if the results are favorable, we Clock Spring Company or by persons the would use the collected data as a basis to Clock Spring Company has trained and change the safety standards that, in certain certified. instances, prohibit the use of Clock Spring® wrap as a pipeline repair method. Authority: 49 U.S.C. §60118(c) As mentioned above, GRI has agreed to assist operators in this data collection ef- George W. Tenley, Jr., fort by assuring the data are representa- Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. tive. GRI also will assist operators to [FR Doc. 95-4704 Filed 2-24-95; 8:45 am] evaluate the wrap in a statistical sampling of sites, record the results, and provide the results to RSPA. GRI's participation will add uniformity and reliability to evalua- tions that might otherwise vary among operators. Thus, we believe GRI's partici- pation is an integral part of this waiver. Any operator who is unwilling to cooper- ate with GRI in the data collection aspect of this waiver is not entitled to apply the waiver.

Grant of Waiver.Therefore, for the reasons stated in Notice 1 of this proceed- ing, RSPA, by this order, finds that the re- quested waiver is not inconsistent with pipeline safety. The petition for waiver of §§ 192.485 and 192.713(a), allowing the use of Clock Spring® wrap to repair large areas of general corrosion or other imper- fections or damage on transmission lines operating at 40 percent or more of SMYS, is granted to the 28 companies and their subsidiaries, subject to the following con- ditions:

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 1995 Pages10630 - 10632 3/3 P-93-2W, #2 535-70 16882 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 7, 1999 /Proposed Rules

nust get approval from government *egulators to use innovative repair :echnologies. The proposed standard would encourage technological innovations and reduce repair costs without reducing safety. DATES: Submit written comments by June 7, 1999. ADDRESSES: All comments should identify the docket number and title of this action, which are stated above in the heading. Comments may be mailed or delivered to the Docket Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room #PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590-0001. The original and two copies should be submitted. Persons who want confirmation of mailed comments must include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Comments may also be e- mailed to [email protected] in ASCII or text format. The Dockets Facility is open from 10:00 a.m. to 5:OO p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays when the facility is closed. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L. M. Furrow at (202)366-4559 or [email protected]. Comments may be read on the internet at http:// dms.dot.gov. General information about RSPA’s pipeline safety program can be obtained at http://ops.dot.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Current Pipeline Repair Safety Standards If a pipeline operator discovers an unsafe pipe dent during the construction of a steel gas transmission line or main to be operated at 20 percent or more of specified minimum yield strength (SMYS), DOT safety standards require that the operator remove the dent by cutting out the damaged piece DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION of pipe as a cylinder (49 CFR 192.309(b)). This repair requirement Research and Special Programs does not allow operators to use new or Administration more innovative technologies to repair the dent. 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195/ \ One of the DOT maintenance [Docket No. RSPA-98-4733; Notice l] standards for steel gas transmission lines operating at 40 percent or more of RIN 2137-AD25 SMYS similarly disallows the use of Pipeline Safety: Gas and Hazardous new technologies (49 CFR 192.713). Liquid Pipeline Repair Under this standard, if an operator discovers an imperfection or damage to AGENCY: Research and Special Programs pipe that impairs the serviceability of Administration (RSPA), DOT. the line, the operator must either ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. replace the pipe or repair it by installing a full encirclement split sleeve of SUMMARY: We are proposing to adopt a appropriate design. Although this safety performance standard for the standard permits operators to use two repair of corroded or damaged steel pipe widely-accepted methods of pipe repair, in gas or hazardous liquid pipelines. because it prescribes methods of repair Because present safety standards specify rather than what the repair should particular methods of repair, operators accomplish, the standard lacks Federal Register /Vol. 64, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 7, 1999 /Proposed Rules 16883 flexibility. It denies operators the which consists of a fiberglass/polyester under normal operating and opportunity to take advantage of composite material coiled with adhesive maintenance conditions. innovative repair methods. It also in layers over a filler, reinforces steel Whether a particular repair method discourages operators from developing pipe that has certain non-leaking will restore the serviceability of the pipe new repair methods that may be more defects. According to tests and analyses depends on the loading the repaired economical. done by the Gas Research Institute pipe must support. Sometimes pipe and Some DOT safety standards governing (GRI), when properly installed, the particularly pipe joints are subjected to the repair of corroded pipe also lack system permanently restores the significant longitudinal forces imposed flexibility: If a gas transmission line has pressure containing capability of the by external loads. Where longitudinal a large area of general corrosion that has pipe. l forces are a design consideration, a reduced the pipe wall below the Based on GRI’s field and laboratory repair method that structurally serves thickness required for the maximum performance data, we concluded that only to contain internal pressure might allowable operating pressure (MAOP), this new technology provides at least not suffice to restore the serviceability the corroded pipe must be replaced, the same level of safety on high-stress of the pipe. On the other hand, if unless its operating pressure is reduced transmission lines as pipe replacement longitudinal forces are not a design (49 CFR 192.485(a)). In gas distribution or a full-encirclement split sleeve. consideration, a repair method that pipelines, such corroded pipe must be Therefore, we granted the operators’ restores the pressure containing replaced (49 CFR 192.487(a)). In requests by waiving the applicable capability of the pipe would restore its hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide requirements. 2 No problems involving serviceability. pipelines, such pipe must be replaced installations under the waivers have We are also proposing that a qualified unless the operating pressure is reduced been reported. Moreover, GRI’s repair method must have undergone (49 CFR 195.416(f)). inspection of a statistical sample of “reliable engineering tests and All these repair standards were based installations under the waivers did not analyses” to confirm that the method on recommended industry practices in show any evidence of creep, meets the performance standard. We do vogue over 30 years ago. The 1968 degradation, or loss of reinforcement.3 not believe it necessary to propose edition of the American Society of guidelines for these tests and analyses Mechanical Engineers (ASME) B3 1.8 The Proposal because of the widespread use of Code was the basis for 5s 192.309(b) and To add flexibility to 5s 192.309(b), alternative repair methods without 192.713, while 5s 192.485(a) and 192.485(a), 192.487(a), 192.713, and reports of failures. So the tests and 192.487(a) were based on the 1969 195.416(f), we are proposing to allow analyses need only be what a reasonable edition of the National Association of operators to use repair methods that and prudent professional engineer Corrosion Engineers Standard RP-0 l- meet a performance standard. The would consider adequate to demonstrate 69. Section 195.416(f) was based on a proposed standard is that the method compliance with the performance comparable provision of the 1966 must be able to “permanently restore standard. edition of the ASME B31.4 Code. Since the serviceability of the pipe.” We chose The proposed change to § 192.309(b) then, the DOT standards based on these this wording because it describes the merely adds the performance standard practices have not kept pace with result expected from replacing damaged to the end of the introductory clause. changes in technology. pipe or installing a full-encirclement Operators would then have the option of Performance Oriented Standards and split sleeve over the damage to pipe. We either removing or repairing the Recent Waivers expect at least the same result from a described dents. qualified alternative repair method. In §$j 192.485(a), 192.487(a), and For steel pipe not subject to repair As to the permanency of repair, we 195.4 16(f), the proposed performance restrictions under 55 192.309(b), are not suggesting that the repair should standard would take the place of present 192.485(a), 192.487(a), 192.713, or last indefinitely. It need last only as wording that allows the repair of small 195.4 16(f), operators may and do use long as the pipe is expected to last areas of general corrosion. methods besides pipe replacement and Consequently, any corroded area, large split sleeves to repair corroded or 1 D. R. Stephens, Summary of Validation of Clock or small, could be repaired as long as damaged steel pipe. These methods Spring@ for Permanent Repair of Pipeline Corrosion the repair method meets the include composite pipe wraps, grinding, Defects, GRI-98/0227, Gas Research Institute, performance standard. The primary Chicago, Illinois, October 1998. hot tapping, and weld deposition. For 2 First we granted the Panhandle Eastern purpose of this change would be to example, a gouge that impairs the Corporation a waiver of § 192.7 13(a) to install Clock allow the repair of large corroded areas. serviceability of a steel gas transmission Spring@ over six corrosion anomalies on Line #2 in But we are proposing to apply the line operating at less than 40 percent of Ohio, subject to certain monitoring and reporting proposed performance standard to small conditions (58 FR 13823: March 15, 1993) Then we SMYS is not covered by 5 192.713. This granted 28 interstate operators and their corroded areas as well because of the defect would be subject to the less subsidiaries a waiver of !j§ 192.485(a) and difficulty of distinguishing between restrictive repair requirement of 192.7 13 (a) to install Clock Spring@ on transmission small and large areas. Also, current § 192.703(b), which allows repair by any line pipe operating at 40 percent or more of SMYS, methods being used to repair small provided the operators follow the manufacturer’s method that returns the pipe to a safe installation procedures, use GRIWrap@ (a computer corroded areas readily qualify under the condition. program that determines if a defect is suitable for proposed performance standard. In recent years, various pipeline Clock Spring@ repair), participate in GRI’s As for § 192.713, besides including operators have sought relief from the evaluation plan, notify us and state interstate agents the proposed performance standard, we requirement to repair high-stress steel of planned installations, and use trained installers (60 FR 10630: February 27, 1995). Next we are proposing to remove the sentences gas transmission lines by the traditional extended the February 27th waiver to include six specifically allowing repair by full- methods of pipe replacement or more interstate operators (60 FR 47800; September encirclement split sleeves (paragraphs installation of full-encirclement split 14. 1995). Subsequently, we authorized a few (a) (2) and (b)). This well-established sleeves. These operators wanted to use additional interstate operators to apply the February 27th waiver, and we approved similar waivers repair method readily qualifies under a new repair system called Clock granted intrastate operators by state pipeline safety the proposed performance standard. Spring@ to simplify and reduce the agencies in Illinois, Wyoming, and Minnesota. In addition, we are proposing to drop average cost of repairs. This system, 3 D. R. Stephens, op. cit., p. 53. the priority that 5 192.7 13 now gives to 16884 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 7, 1999 /Proposed Rules repair by replacement whenever it is covered by the waivers. This proposed would not significantly affect the feasible to take a damaged pipeline out rulemaking fosters the use and quality of the human environment. An of service. We know of no compelling development of new repair technologies environmental assessment document is safety reason to justify this priority, and without additional cost to the regulated available for review in the docket. it does not permit the use of other industry. A regulatory evaluation G. Impact on Business Processes and qualified, more economical repair document is available for review in the Computer Sys terns methods while a pipeline is shut down. docket. Many computers that use two digits to For regulatory consistency, we would B. Regulatory Flexibility Act also remove a similar replacement keep track of dates will, on January 1, priority from § 192.717, which governs The proposed rule changes would not 2000, recognize “double zero” not as the repair of leaks. impose additional requirements on 2000 but as 1900. This glitch, the Year Finally, we are proposing to terminate pipeline operators, including small 2000 problem, could cause computers to the requirement under §§ 192.713(a)(l) entities that operate regulated pipelines. stop running or to start generating and 192.7 17 (a) (1) that replacement pipe Rather, the proposed changes would erroneous data. The Year 2000 problem have “similar or greater design strength” offer operators the opportunity to use poses a threat to the global economy in than the pipe being replaced. This more economical methods of repairing which Americans live and work. With qualification, which does not apply to corroded or damaged pipe. Thus, this the help of the President’s Council on the replacement of corroded pipe under proposal may reduce costs to operators, Year 2000 Conversion, Federal agencies $$j 192.485, 192.487, or 195.416, may including small entities. Based on the are reaching out to increase awareness result in an overly conservative design facts available about the anticipated of the problem and to offer support. We that is unnecessary for current impact of this proposed rulemaking, I do not want to impose new operations. The safety of all replacement certify, pursuant to Section 605 of the requirements that would mandate pipe in gas transmission lines is Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. business process changes when the otherwise governed by the material, 605), that this proposed rulemaking resources necessary to implement those design, construction, and testing would not have a significant economic requirements would otherwise be requirements of Part 192. impact on a substantial number of small applied to the Year 2000 Problem. entities. This notice of proposed rulemaking Regulatory Analyses and Notices does not propose business process C. Executive Order 13084 A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT changes or require modifications to Policies and Procedures The proposed rules have been computer systems. Because this notice analyzed in accordance with the apparently does not affect the ability of The Office of Management and Budget principles and criteria contained in organizations to respond to the Year (OMB) does not consider this proposed Executive Order 13084, “Consultation 2000 problem, we do not intend to delay rulemaking to be a significant regulatory and Coordination with Indian Tribal the effectiveness of the rule changes action under Section 3(f) of Executive Governments.” Because the proposed proposed in this notice. Order 12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4, rules would not significantly or 1993). Therefore, OMB has not reviewed uniquely affect the Indian tribal H. Executive Order 12612 this rulemaking document. DOT does governments, the funding and This action would not have not consider this proposed rulemaking consultation requirements of Executive substantial direct effects on states, on significant under its regulatory policies Order 13084 do not apply. the relationship between the Federal and procedures (44 FR 11034; February Government and the states, or on the 26, 1979). D. Paperwork Reduction Act distribution of power and The proposed rule changes would This proposed rulemaking contains responsibilities among the various provide operators flexibility to choose no information collection that is subject levels of government. the most cost-effective method of to review by OMB under the Paperwork Therefore, in accordance with repairing pipe, while maintaining Reduction Act of 1995. Executive Order 126 12 (52 FR 4 1685; public safety. Thus, the changes would October 30, 1987), RSPA has not add costs to industry, government, E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 determined that the proposed rules do or the public. In fact, the proposed not have sufficient federalism changes should reduce operators’ costs This proposed rulemaking would not implications to warrant preparation of a of transporting oil and gas, and perhaps impose unfunded mandates under the Federalism Assessment. the price consumers pay for these Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of products. In comments on a proposed 1995. It would not result in costs of List of Subjects waiver to the Panhandle Eastern $100 million or more to either State, 49 CFR Part 192 Corporation, the American Gas local, or tribal governments, in the Association estimated that industry aggregate, or to the private sector, and Natural gas, Pipeline safety, Reporting could save $6.5 million a year by using would be the least burdensome and recordkeeping requirements. composite wrap to repair corroded or alternative that achieves the objective of 49 CFR Part 195 damaged pipe. Although part of the gas the rule. Ammonia, Carbon dioxide, pipeline industry is already realizing Petroleum, Pipeline safety, Reporting these savings because of the Panhandle F. Na tional Environmental Policy Act and other waivers,4 the proposed We have analyzed the proposed rule and recordkeeping requirements. In consideration of the foregoing, we changes would create a similar changes for purposes of the National propose to amend 49 CFR parts 192 and opportunity for savings by the entire oil Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 195 as follows: and gas pipeline industry. And still 4321 et seq.). Because the changes more savings could possibly result from would require that alternative repair PART 192-[AMENDED] the use of innovative technologies not methods be as safe as the methods now allowed, we have preliminarily 1. The authority citation for part 192 4 See note 2. determined that the proposed changes continues to read as follows: Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 7, 1999 /Proposed Rules 16885

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, Q 192.713 Transmission lines: Permanent 60108,60109,60110,60113, and 60118; and field repair of imperfections and damages. 49 CFR 1.53. (a) Each imperfection or damage that 2. In 5 192.309, paragraph (b) impairs the serviceability of pipe in a introductory text would be revised to steel transmission line operating at or read as follows: above 40 percent of SMYS must be- Q 192.309 Repair of steel pipe. (1) Removed by cutting out and * * * * * replacing a cylindrical piece of pipe: or (b) Each of the following dents must (2) Repaired by a method that can be removed from steel pipe to be permanently restore the serviceability of the pipe, as shown by reliable operated at a pressure that produces a engineering tests and analyses. hoop stress of 20 percent, or more, of SMYS, unless the dent is repaired by a (b) Operating pressure must be method that can permanently restore the reduced to a safe level during repair serviceability of the pipe, as shown by operations. reliable engineering tests and analyses: 6. In 192.717, paragraph (a)(l) and * * * * * paragraph (a) (2) introductory text would 3. Section 192.485(a) would be be revised to read as follows: revised to read as follows: Q 192.717 Transmission lines: Permanent field repair of leaks. 5 192.485 Remedial measures: * * * Transmission lines. (4 (a) General corrosion. Each segment of (1) Remove the leak by cutting out transmission line with general corrosion and replacing a cylindrical piece of and with a remaining wall thickness pipe. less than that required for the MAOP of (2) Install a full encirclement welded the pipeline must be replaced or the split sleeve of appropriate design, operating pressure reduced unless the transmission line: commensurate with the strength of the * * * * * pipe based on actual remaining wall thickness. However, corroded pipe may PART 195-[AMENDED] be repaired by a method that can permanently restore the serviceability of 7. The authority citation for Part 195 the pipe, as shown by reliable continues to read as follows: engineering tests and analyses. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, Corrosion pitting so closely grouped as 60108,60109,60118, and 49 CFR 1.53. to affect the overall strength of the pipe 8. Section 195.416(f) would be revisec is considered general corrosion for the purpose of this paragraph. to read as follows: * * * * * 5 195.416 External corrosion control. 4. Section 192.487(a) would be * * * * * revised to read as follows: (f) Any pipe that is found to be 0 192.487 Remedial measures: Distribution generally corroded so that the remaininl lines other than cast iron or ductile iron wall thickness is less than the minimun lines. thickness required by the pipe (a) General corrosion. Except for cast specification tolerances must be iron or ductile iron pipe, each segment replaced with coated pipe that meets th of generally corroded distribution line requirements of this part. However, pipe with a remaining wall thickness generally corroded pipe need not be less than that required for the MAOP of replaced if- the pipeline, or a remaining wall (1) The operating pressure is reduced thickness less than 30 percent of the to be commensurate with the limits on nominal wall thickness, must be operating pressure specified in this replaced. subpart, based on the actual remaining However, corroded pipe may be wall thickness: or repaired by a method that can (2) The pipe is repaired by a method permanently restore the serviceability of that can permanently restore the the pipe, as shown by reliable serviceability of the pipe, as shown by engineering tests and analyses. reliable engineering tests and analyses. Corrosion pitting so closely grouped as * * * * * to affect the overall strength of the pipe Issued in Washington, D.C. on April 1, is considered general corrosion for the 1999. purpose of this paragraph. Richard B. Felder, * * * * * Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. 5. Section 192.713 would be revised (FR Dot. 99-8574 Filed 4-6-99; 8:45 am] to read as follows: BILLING CODE 4910-60-P 68 9w

69660 Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 239 /Tuesday, December 14, 1999 /Rules and Regulations

ACTION: Final rule. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

SUMMARY: We are adopting a safety Background performance standard for the repair of Listed below are safety standards in corroded or damaged steel pipe in gas or hazardous liquid pipelines. Because 49 CFR part 192 for gas transmission present safety standards specify and distribution lines and 49 CFR part particular methods of repair, operators 1% for hazardous liquid pipelines that must get approval from government specify methods of repairing corrosion regulators to use innovative repair and other defects in metallic pipe. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION technologies. The performance standard Research and Special Programs is likely to encourage technological innovations and reduce repair costs Administration without reducing safety. EFFECTIVE DATE This final rule takes 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195 16 : effect January 13, 2000. [Docket No. RSPA-98-4733; A/m&. 192-88; 195481 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L. M. Furrow at (202) 366-4559 or RIN 2137-AD25 [email protected]. You can read comments and other material in the Pipeline Safety: Gas and Hazardous docket at this internet web address: Liquid Pipeline Repair http://dms.dot.gov. General information AGENCY: Research and Special Programs about our pipeline safety program can Administration (RSPA), DOT. be obtained at http://ops.dot.gov.

Section Pipe Defect Repair Method

$j 192.309(b) ...... Certain steel transmission lines or Dent of particular characteristic ...... Remove by cutting out length of pipe mains. 5 192.485(a) ...... Metallic transmission lines ...... Large area of general corrosion does Remove by cutting out length of pipe, not support maximum allowable oper- unless operating pressure is reduced ating pressure (MAOP). 5 192.487(a) ...... Metallic distribution lines (except cast or Large area of general corrosion does Remove by cutting out length of pipe ductile iron). not support MAOP or has more than 70% wall loss. tj 192.713 ...... High-stress steel transmission lines...... Imperfection or damage impairs service- Remove by cutting out length of pipe, or ability. install full-encirclement split sleeve 9 192.717 ...... Steel transmission lines ...... Leaking defect ...... Remove by cutting out length of pipe, install full-encirclement welded split sleeve, or apply other specified repair methods 5 195.416(f) ...... Steel pipeline ...... Largearea of general corrosion reduces Replace with coated pipe, unless oper- wall thickness below minimum in pipe ating pressure is reduced specification.

Because these standards prescribe lack flexibility. They do not allow discourage operators from developing methods of repair rather than what the operators to use new or more innovative new repair methods that may be more repair should accomplish, the standards repair technologies. They also economical. In contrast, under less Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 1999 /Rules and Regulations 69661 restrictive standards in Parts 192 and §§ 192.713 and 192.717 give to pipe operators the flexibility to choose the 195, operators may and do use methods replacement whenever it is feasible to most cost-effective technology to do a besides pipe replacement and split take a damaged pipeline out of service. particular job, in this case repairing sleeves, such as composite pipe wraps, And we proposed to terminate the corroded or other damaged pipe. They grinding, hot tapping, and weld requirement in these sections that also create a disincentive for operators deposition, to repair corroded or replacement pipe have “similar or to invest in the development of new damaged pipe. For example, a gouge greater design strength” than the pipe technology. Moreover, properly crafted that impairs the serviceability of a steel being replaced. We think this performance standards can bar the use gas transmission line not covered by requirement is overly conservative, and of unacceptable technology. Therefore, § 192.713 may be repaired under the safety of replacement pipe is we did not adopt this commenter’s 5 192.703(b) by any method that returns otherwise governed by the material, suggestion. the pipe to a safe condition. design, construction, and testing Clarity of Proposal In recent years, we and a few state requirements of Part 192. pipeline safety agencies waived the As discussed above, we proposed to requirements of §§ 192.485(a) and Discussion of Comments widen operators’ choices of repair 192.713 so operators could use a new We received comments from the methods by allowing pipe to be repair system called Clock Spring@ wrap following sources in response to the “repaired by a method that can to simplify and reduce the average cost NPRM: permanently restore the serviceability of the pipe, as shown by reliable of repairs (60 FR 10630; February 27, Trade association: American Gas engineering tests and analyses.” The 1995). This system, which consists of a Association Colorado Interstate Gas Company fiberglass/polyester composite material Interstate gas pipeline operators: thought this wording could be coiled with adhesive in layers over a Colorado Interstate Gas Company, misinterpreted to require tests and filler, reinforces steel pipe that has CMS Energy Corporation, Duke analyses of completed repairs. This certain non-leaking defects. According Energy Corporation, Enron Gas commenter suggested we use the to tests and analyses done by the Gas Pipeline Group, Paiute Pipeline following alternative wording to Research Institute, when properly Company, and Southern Natural Gas installed, the system permanently emphasize that the repair method is to Company be tested and analyzed: “* * * using a restores the pressure containing Gas distribution operators: Southwest capability of the pipe (D.R. Stephens, method qualified by reliable engineering Gas Corporation and Consumers tests and analyses, each repair must Summary of Validation of Clock Spring Energy Company for Permanent Repair of Pipeline permanently restore the serviceability of Manufacturer: Clock Spring Company, the ipe.” Corrosion Defects, GRI-98/0227, Gas L.P. Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois, Arter considering the matter, we think Engineering firm: Stress Engineering October 1998). the syntax of the proposed requirement Services, Inc. for tests and analyses could possibly Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Engineering consultant: Foy Milton, PE cause the requirement to be Recognizing the need for flexibility in Of the 12 commenters, four misconstrued to apply to completed §§ 192.309(b), 192.485(a), 192.487(a), (Consumers Energy Company, Paiute repairs rather than repair methods. 192.713, and 195.416(f), we published a Pipeline Company, Southern Natural Therefore, in the final rules, we revised notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) Gas Company, and Southwest Gas the wording of the proposal as follows to amend these rules to permit operators Corporation) supported the proposed to better indicate the purpose of the to use repair methods that meet a rules without change; one (Foy Milton) tests and analyses: “repaired by a performance standard (64 FR 16882; opposed use of a performance standard method that reliable engineering tests April 7, 1999). The standard we for pipe repairs; one (American Gas and analyses show can permanently proposed was that the repair method be Association) supported the proposals restore the serviceability of the pipe.” able to “permanently restore the but suggested a minor editorial change, We did not adopt the commenter’s serviceability of the pipe,” a result which is included in final § 192.717; suggested rewrite because we believe it comparable to that expected from and the remaining six commenters would, perhaps inadvertently, regulate replacing damaged pipe or installing a favored the proposals in general but completed repairs in addition to repair full-encirclement split sleeve. We suggested substantive changes. Our methods, a result not intended by the explained that such restoration would disposition of the lone opposing proposal. be permanent if the repair were comment and those comments Test Criteria expected to last as long as the pipe suggesting substantive changes is under normal operating and discussed under the following headings. The Clock Spring Company was concerned that operators’ freedom of maintenance conditions. Specification vs. Performance For assurance that a repair method interpretation under the proposed rules indeed meets the performance standard, Asserting advantages of the existing might threaten the integrity of repairs we further proposed that the method specification-type standards (uniformity made by non-traditional methods. This must have undergone “reliable of application, ease of understanding, commenter suggested we augment the engineering tests and analyses.” voluntary standards committee backing, proposal by including minimum test Although no guidelines for these tests and disallowance of unacceptable repair criteria, such as long term strength, and analyses were proposed, we said methods), Foy Milton urged us not to go environmental compatibility, and “the tests and analyses need only be forward with the proposed rule changes. dynamic forces, and require that testing what a reasonable and prudent While we agree that specification-type be consistent with ASTM D2992-96, professional engineer would consider standards may be appropriate in some Standard Practice for Obtaining adequate to demonstrate compliance instances, they are not the standards of Hydrostatic or Pressure Design Basis for with the performance standard.” choice for mechanisms undergoing “Fiberglass” (Glass-Fiber-Reinforced Besides the performance standard, we advancements in technology. Thermosetting-Resin) Pipe and Fittings. also proposed to drop the priority that Specification-type standards deny Alternatively, the company 69662 Federal Register / Vol. 64 No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 1999 /Rules and Regulations recommended that we devise testing which is consistent with current judging compliance with many criteria based on the years of industry practices, would hinder future performance standards in Parts 192 and engineering experience in developing innovation. Although we agree with 195. Clock Spring wrap. Similarly, Stress Enron that without such a requirement Engineering Services, Inc., a participant operators would still have to Repair by Replacement in proving the integrity of two demonstrate the validity of their Duke Energy, CMS Energy, and Enron composite repair methods, Clock Spring compliance efforts, the nature of such suggested that because pipe replacement wrap and Armor Plate Pipe Wrap, demonstrations would be discretionary is one of several methods that could be thought guidelines for testing new and could have less probative value used under proposed §§ 192.485(a), composite repair methods were needed than reliable engineering tests and 192.487(a), and 192.713(a) to repair to properly assess critical technical analyses. corroded or damaged pipe, these rules issues. Enclosed with this comment was Furthermore, a majority of would be clearer if they referred only to a set of 15 guidelines for testing commenters apparently support our repair rather than to both replacement composite materials. position. Except for Foy Milton, who and repair. Although the premise of this In sharp contrast, the Enron Gas advised us not to change the existing comment is correct, the proposed rules Pipeline Group said the proposed rules, seven of the remaining eleven distinguished replacement from other testing and analyses requirement is commenters supported the proposed methods of repair because throughout unnecessary. As support for this rules in general and expressed no Parts 192 and 195 replacement is position, Enron cited performance specific opinion on the proposed distinguished from other methods of standards, such as § 195.422, as having requirement for reliable engineering repair. This distinction is significant satisfactorily controlled safety problems tests and analyses. Also, as discussed because pipe replacement triggers safety without requiring tests and analyses to below, our two pipeline safety advisory requirements, such as those involving demonstrate compliance. Enron also committees approved the proposed pipe design, construction, and pressure contended that performance standards rules without recommending any testing, that do not apply to other implicitly require operators to prove change to this requirement. methods of pipe repair. Giving special that methods used to achieve In the NPRM, we described the emphasis to replacement in repair rules compliance will indeed do so, and that “reliable engineering tests and highlights the need for replacement pipe requiring tests and analyses would analyses” that would be necessary to to meet these additional safetv hinder operators’ freedom to use show that a particular repair method requirements. So we do not &ink the innovative technologies. will perform as required. We said the commenters’ suggestion would Our position, like the proposal, lies tests and analyses need only be what a necessarily contribute to overall clarity. between these two different views. We reasonable and prudent professional are not persuaded that the proposed engineer would consider adequate to Corrosion Repairs testing requirement needs demonstrate compliance with the Duke Energy, CMS Energy, and Enron strengthening. By and large, the pipeline performance standard. We recognize suggested that including the proposed industry’s repair practices have been that licensed professional engineers may performance standard under very conservative and slow to differ on what information is necessary §§ 192.485(a) and 192.487(a) was incorporate non-traditional methods. to demonstrate the performance of redundant, because corrosion repairs For example, the industry did not use particular technologies in particular would be subject to the same standard Clock Spring or Armor Plate until after circumstances. But the experience of under proposed 5 192.713(a). But this ample hard evidence was produced to Clock Spring and Armor Plate wraps observation is only partially correct, prove the lasting integrity of pipe can serve as a model in determining the because § 192.713(a) applies only to repaired by these methods. And the technical issues to resolve and the certain high-stress steel transmission quality of these repairs, a great many of relevant substantiating tests and lines, while §§ 192.485(a) and which have been done without the need analyses. We will look to this 192.487(a) apply to all metallic for a waiver of Part 192 or 195 experience to guide our inspections for transmission or distribution lines. If the standards, is shown by the lack of compliance with the final rule. In this proposed performance standard were reports of incidents or near-incidents regard, we would welcome not included under §§ 192.485(a) and attributable to faulty repairs. We think opportunities to preview new pipeline 192.487(a), corrosion repairs on the industry is unlikely to take any less repair technologies in the development pipelines not covered by § 192.713(a) conservative approach to new repair stage to avert possible compliance would not be subject to the proposed technologies that may become available issues later on when the technologies standard. So we have left the proposed for use in the future. are marketed. performance standard in final At the same time, we still believe that With the growth of repair technology, 55 192.485(a) and 192.487(a). a requirement for tests and analyses is we expect that voluntary efforts will needed. Given that pipe replacement respond to any possible demand for Leak Repairs and full-encirclement split sleeves are uniform testing criteria. As mentioned Duke Energy, CMS Energy, and Enron time-tested methods of pipe repair, a above, Stress Engineering has already further suggested that the proposed requirement for reliable engineering moved in this direction for certain performance standard under tests and analyses will provide public composite wraps. And other firms and § 192.713(a) for non-leaking defects confidence in the safety of innovative organizations may develop additional should apply to leaking defects as well. methods intended as alternatives to criteria for different repair techniques. This change, they said, would be these time-tested methods. The lack of Such criteria could be incorporated in consistent with the purpose of the similar requirements elsewhere in the voluntary standards, such as ASME rulemaking and allow the removal of regulations is not sufficient reason to B31.4 or B31.8, or in publications such 5 192.717, which requires specific repair drop a proposed requirement intended as GPTC/ANSI 2380.1, Guide for Gas methods for transmission line leaks. to assure the integrity of innovative Transmission and Distribution Piping We did not propose to apply the repair alternatives. Enron did not Systems. We now use these documents proposed performance standard to explain why the proposed requirement, as a guide to acceptable practices in methods of repairing pipe leaks because Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 239 /Tuesday, December 14, 1999 /Rules and Regulations 69663 the impetus for this rulemaking, Clock or repair unnecessary. Therefore, we Evaluation, which is discussed below. A Spring wrap, is not designed to repair have not included the suggested transcript and report of each leaks. Still, as explained in the NPRM, amendment in final 5 192.713. committee’s consideration of the NPRM the purpose of this rulemaking is to Both the existing and proposed is available in the docket. make the pipe repair regulations more § 192.713 call for a reduction in During the May 4th meeting, one flexible so that operators have operating pressure to a safe level during advisory committee member questioned incentives to innovate and greater repairs. But Duke Energy, CMS Energy, the appropriateness of the term freedom in selecting repair methods. and Enron pointed out that such a “generally corroded” in the first And, as the commenters indicated, reduction is unnecessary if the sentence of § 195.416(f). This sentence achieving this goal does not depend on operating pressure is already at a level reads: “Any pipe that is found to be whether the defect to be repaired is safe for repairs. These commenters leaking nor on the availability of a non- suggested that the rule merely provide generally corroded so that the remaining wall thickness is less than the minimum traditional leak repair method that that the operating pressure be at a safe thickness required by the pipe qualifies under the proposed level during repairs. We believe this specification tolerances must be performance standard. In fact, adopting interpretation is a reasonable the proposed performance standard to application of the current rule, so we replaced with coated pipe that meets the authorize alternative leak repair have included the suggested change in requirements of this part.” The member methods is likely to foster the the final rule. suggested that revising this requirement development of new methods of leak to refer to pipe that has “general Dents Found During Construction repair. Therefore, since the proposed corrosion” would clarify the meaning. performance standard is suitable for Existing § 1%.309(b) requires removal In considering this suggestion, we found both non-leaking and leaking defects of unsafe dents found during the that the terms “generally corroded” and and applying the standard to the repair construction of certain transmission “general corrosion” are used in of leaking defects furthers the purpose lines and mains. We proposed to allow §§ 192.485(a), 192.487(a), 195.416(f), of the NPRM, we have added the operators to repair these dents with and 195.418(d) to refer to areas of proposed performance standard to methods that qualify under the corrosion other than corrosion pitting. § 192.717 to cover the permanent repair performance standard discussed above. Indeed, the two terms are used of leaks on transmission lines. As But Enron said the existing, more interchangeably in § 192.487(a). Given discussed below, our gas pipeline safety restrictive requirement is appropriate the common intended meaning of both advisory committee supported this for pipeline construction and saw no terms, which our experience indicates is action. need for change. Alone among the universally understood and applied in Contrary to the commenters’ commenters, it said the existing removal the pipeline industry, and the lack of suggestion, however, merely extending requirement is reasonable because, any compliance difficulty caused by the 5 192.713 to cover leaking defects would during construction, the dented pipe is term “generally corroded,” we decided not enable removal of § 192.717. Section accessible and not yet in service, and not to adopt the member’s suggested 192.717 is broader in scope; it applies machinery and labor are on site or change to 5 195.416(f). to all steel transmission lines, not just readily available. We are not swayed by As discussed above under Leak those that come under § 192.713. this reasoning, however. Although we Repairs, Duke Energy, CMS Energy, and agree the burden of removal may be Enron suggested that the proposed Reducing Operating Pressure lessened somewhat by the performance standard is suitable for Duke Energy, CMS Energy, and Enron circumstances of construction, we find leaking as well as non-leaking defects. asked that we amend § 192.713 to state it more reasonable to adopt a regulation To help us assess this comment, at the that operators may reduce the maximum that permits remedial options that can November 4,1999, TPSSC meeting in allowable operating pressure of provide equivalent safety at possibly Washington, DC, we asked the TPSSC defective pipe to a safe level instead of less cost. Final § 192.309(b) is, therefore, for advice on whether we should add permanently repairing the pipe. Section adopted as proposed. the performance standard to § 192.717, 192.485 allows this alternative on Advisory Committee Consideration which prescribes repair methods for corroded transmission line pipe where a leaks on gas transmission lines. The safe operating pressure can be We presented the NPRM for TPSSC voted, with one abstention, to calculated under accepted engineering consideration by the Technical Pipeline support including the performance guidelines based on the remaining Safety Standards Committee (TPSSC) standard in § 192.717. A transcript and strength of the corroded pipe (e.g., and the Technical Hazardous Liquid report of the TPSSC’s consideration of ASME B31.G1991). After the MAOP is Pipeline Safety Standards Committee this matter is available in the docket. reduced to a safe level, the corrosion no (THLPSSC) at a meeting in Washington, longer impairs the serviceability of the DC on May 4,1999. The TPSSC is Regulatory Analyses and Notices pipe, making the repair requirement of RSPA’s statutory advisory committee for A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT 5 192.713 inapplicable. But we are not gas pipeline safety and the THLPSSC is Regulatory Policies and Procedures aware of comparable engineering RSPA’s statutory advisory committee for guidelines for determining the safe hazardous liquid pipeline safety. Each DOT does not consider this operating pressure of steel pipe that has committee has 15 members, rulemaking to be a significant regulatory defects other than corrosion, such as representing industry, government, and action under Section 3(f) of Executive scratches, gouges, or dents. Although the public, who are qualified to consider Order 12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4, operators may reduce operating pressure the technical feasibility, reasonableness, 1993), and the Office of Management as a temporary protective measure cost-effectiveness, and practicability of and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed this under 5 192.711, in the absence of such proposed pipeline safety standards. rulemaking document. Also, DOT does guidelines, there is no accepted way to Both committees voted unanimously to not consider this rulemaking significant judge what amount of pressure approve the proposed rules and to under its regulatory policies and reduction will restore the serviceability approve the associated risk assessment procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, of the defective pipe and make removal information contained in the Regulatory 1979). 69664 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 1999 /Rules and Regulations

The final rules provide operators 13084, “Consultation and Coordination This rulemaking does not require flexibility to choose the most cost- with Indian Tribal Governments.” business process changes or require effective method of repairing pipe, Because the rules will not significantly modifications to computer systems. while maintaining public safety. Thus, or uniquely affect Indian tribal Because this rulemaking does not affect the rules will not add costs to industry, governments, the funding and the ability of organizations to respond to government, or the public. In fact, the consultation requirements of Executive the Year 2000 problem, we have not rules should reduce operators’ costs of Order 13084 do not apply. delayed the effectiveness of the final transporting oil and gas, and perhaps rules. the price consumers pay for these E. Paperwork Reduction Act of 19% products. In comments on a proposed This rulemaking contains no List of Subjects waiver to the Panhandle Eastern information collection that is subject to 49 CFR Part 192 Corporation (58 FR 13823; March 15, review by OMB under the Paperwork Natural gas, Pipeline safety, Reporting 1993), the American Gas Association Reduction Act of 1995. and recordkeeping requirements. estimated that industry could save $6.5 F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of million a year by using composite wrap 49 CFR Part 195 1995 to repair corroded or damaged pipe. Ammonia, Carbon dioxide, Although part of the gas pipeline This rulemaking will not impose Petroleum, Pipeline safety, Reporting industry is already realizing these unfunded mandates under the and recordkeeping requirements. savings because of the Panhandle and Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of In consideration of the foregoing, 49 other waivers, the final rules will create 1995. It will not result in costs of $100 CFR parts 192 and 195 are amended as a similar opportunity for savings by the million or more to either state, local, or follows: entire oil and gas pipeline industry. tribal governments, in the aggregate, or And still more savings could possibly to the private sector, and is the least PART 192-[AMENDED] result from the use of innovative burdensome alternative that achieves technologies not covered by the waivers. the objective of the rulemaking. 1. The authority citation for part 192 continues to read as follows: In fact, this rulemaking fosters the use G. National Environmental Policy Act and development of new repair Authority:49 U.S.C. 5103,60102,60104, technologies without additional cost to We have analyzed the final rules for 60108,60109,60110,60113, and 60118; and the regulated industry. A Final purposes of the National Environmental 49 CFR 1.53. Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 We Regulatory Evaluation document is et seq.). 2. In § 192.309, paragraph (b) prepared an Environmental Assessment available for review in the docket. introductory text is revised to read as (64 FR 16884; April 7,1999) in which follows: B. Regulatory Flexibility Act we concluded that the proposed action This rulemaking will not impose would not significantly affect the 9 192.309 Repair of steel pipe. additional requirements on pipeline human environment because alternative * operators, including small entities that repair methods would have to be as (b) iach if the*folloiing dents must operate regulated pipelines. Rather, the reliable as those the pipeline safety be removed from steel pipe to be rules offer operators the opportunity to regulations currently allow. Thus any operated at a pressure that produces a use more economical methods of alternative method would provide the hoop stress of 20 percent, or more, of repairing corroded or damaged pipe. same level of pipe protection that the SMYS, unless the dent is repaired by a Thus, this rulemaking may reduce costs current repair methods provide. Based method that reliable engineering tests to operators, including small entities. on this Environmental Assessment and and analyses show can permanently Based on the facts available about the no receipt of information showing restore the serviceability of the pipe: expected impact of this rulemaking, I otherwise, we have prepared a Finding * * * * * certify, under section 605 of the of No Significant Impact (FONSI). This 3. Section 192.485(a) is revised to Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. FONSI has been made part of the read as follows: 605), that this rulemaking will not have docket. 5 192.485 Remedial measures: a significant economic impact on a H. Impact on Business Processes and Transmission lines. substantial number of small entities. Computer Systems (a) General corrosion. Each segment of C. Executive Order 12612 Many computers that use two digits to transmission line with general corrosion This rulemaking will not have keep track of dates will, on January 1, and with a remaining wall thickness substantial direct effects on states, on 2000, recognize “double zero” not as less than that required for the MAOP of the relationship between the Federal 2000 but as 1900. This glitch, the Year the pipeline must be replaced or the Government and the states, or on the 2000 Problem, could cause computers to operating pressure reduced distribution of power and stop running or to start generating commensurate with the strength of the responsibilities among the various erroneous data. The Year 2000 problem pipe based on actual remaining wall levels of government. Therefore, in poses a threat to the global economy in thickness. However, corroded pipe may accordance with Executive Order 12612 which Americans live and work. With be repaired by a method that reliable (52 FR 41685; October 30,1987), RSPA the help of the President’s Council on engineering tests and analyses show can has determined that the final rules do Year 2000 Conversion, federal agencies permanently restore the serviceability of not have sufficient federalism are reaching out to increase awareness the pipe. Corrosion pitting so closely implications to warrant preparation of a of the problem and to offer support. We grouped as to affect the overall strength Federalism Assessment. do not want to impose new of the pipe is considered general requirements that would mandate corrosion for the purpose of this D. Executive Order 13084 business process changes when the paragraph. The final rules have been analyzed in resources necessary to implement those * * * * * accordance with the principles and requirements would otherwise be 4. Section 192.487(a) is revised to criteria contained in Executive Order applied to the Year 2000 Problem. read as follows: Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 14, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 69665

5 192.487 Remedial measures: Distribution (4) If the leak is on a submerged lines other than cast iron or ductile iron offshore pipeline or submerged pipeline lines. in inland navigable waters, (a) General corrosion. Except for cast mechanically apply a full encirclement iron or ductile iron pipe, each segment split sleeve of appropriate desi n. of generally corroded distribution line (5) Apply a method that relia% le pipe with a remaining wall thickness engineering tests and analyses show can less than that required for the MAOP of permanently restore the serviceability of the pipeline, or a remaining wall the pipe. thickness less than 30 percent of the nominal wall thickness, must be PART 195-[AMENDED] replaced. However, corroded pipe may be repaired by a method that reliable 8. The authority citation for part 195 engineering tests and analyses show can continues to read as follows: permanently restore the serviceability of Authority:49 U.S.C. 5103,60102,60104, the pipe. Corrosion pitting so closely 60108,60109,60118; and49CFR 1.53. grouped as to affect the overall strength 9. Section 195.416(f) is revised to read of the pipe is considered general as follows: corrosion for the purpose of this paragraph. 5 195.416 External corrosion control. * * * * (fl Lny p;pe th*at is fiund to be 5 192.711 [Amended] generally corroded so that the remaining 5. In 5 192.711(b), remove wall thickness is less than the minimum “5 192.717(a)(3)” and add thickness required by the pipe 4g, 192.717ibj(3j” in its place. specification tolerances must be 6. Section 192.713 is revised to read replaced with coated pipe that meets the as follows: requirements of this part. However, 5 192.713 Transmission lines: Permanent generally corroded pipe need not be field repair of imperfections and damages. re laced if- (a) Each imperfection or damage that P1) The operating pressure is reduced impairs the serviceability of pipe in a to be commensurate with the limits on steel transmission line operating at or operating pressure specified in this above 40 percent of SMYS must be- subpart, based on the actual remaining (1) Removed bv cutting out and wall thickness; or re - lacing a cylindrical yece of pipe; or (2) The pipe is repaired by a method P2) Repaired by a metK od that reliable that reliable engineering tests and engineering tests and analyses show can analyses show can permanently restore permanently restore the serviceability of the serviceability of the pipe. * * * * * thTb$)i8Ferating pressure must be at a Issued in Washington, DC on December 8, safe level during repair operations. 1999. 7. Section 192.717 is revised to read Kelley S. Coyner, as follows: Administrator. 5 192.717 Transmission Permanent [FR Dot. 99-32274 Filed 12-13-99; 8:45 am] field repair of leaks. BILLING CODE 4910-69-P Each permanent field repair of a leak on a transmission line must be made by- (a) Removing the leak by cutting out and replacing a cylindrical piece of pi e; or Pb) Repairing the leak by one of the following methods: (I) Install a full encirclement welded split sleeve of appropriate design, unless the transmission line is joined by mechanical couplings and operates at less than 40 percent of SMYS. (2) If the leak is due to a corrosion pit, install a properly designed bolt-on-leak clam (3)Pf the leak is due to a corrosion pit and on pipe of not more than 40,000 psi (267 Mpa) SMYS, fillet weld over the pitted area a steel plate patch with rounded corners, of the same or greater thickness than the pipe, and not more than one-half of the diameter of the pipe in size.