Interpretation Response #PI-76-080 ([EXXON Pipeline Company] [Roy R. Die])

Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date: 12/22/1976

Company Name: EXXON Pipeline Company

Individual Name: Roy R. Die

Location State: TX Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

December 22, 1976

Mr. Roy R. Die
Vice President-Operations
EXXON Pipeline Company
P.O. Box 2220
Houston, Texas 77001

Dear Mr. Die:

This refers to your petition (Docket No. 75-11W), requesting a waiver from compliance with (1) the wording requirements of 49 CFR 192.707(d) for 2,850 existing line marking signs located other than at navigable waterways and (2) the color and wording requirements of 49 CFR 192.707(e) for 60 existing line marking signs at navigable waterways until the signs must be replaced due to deterioration.

With regard to the 2,850 existing line marking signs located other than at navigable waterways, the sign wording technically does not meet the requirements of Section 192.707(d) because the word "gas" is omitted. However, by specifically identifying the gaseous commodity being transported, the signs convey the information intended to be provided under Section 192.707(d).

Since, undoubtedly, many operators may be in a similar situation, this aspect of your petition is considered as a request for rulemaking rather than waiver and is hereby granted. We will amend Section 192.707(d) to permit line marking signs to identify the commodity being transported as an alternative to stating the word "gas."

We object, however, to the proposed continued use of 68 signs at navigable waterways beyond the January 1, 1980, deadline for compliance with Section 192.707(e). A primary objective of Section 192.707(e) is uniformity of pipeline markers at navigable waterways consistent with the Uniform State Waterway Marking System set forth in 33 CFR Part 66 [sic]. To grant the
requested waiver would not be in accord with this objective. A brief discussion concerning existing line markers and their replacement is included in the preamble to the final line marking
rule under the heading "Paragraph (f), existing markers." A copy of this preamble and final rule is enclosed. As indicated therein the replacement cost of recently installed markers was considered in setting the January 1, 1980, deadline, which allows existing markers to be used for almost five years after the effective date
of Section 192.707(e). The situation involving the 68 markers does not at all differ from the rationale for setting the January 1, 1980, deadline so as to justify granting a waiver. For these
reasons, this aspect of your request is denied.

In accordance with applicable procedures, a public hearing is not required before reaching this decision.

Sincerely,

Cesar DeLeon
Acting Director
Office of Pipeline
Safety Operations

Enclosure

Regulation Sections