Interpretation Response #PI-83-0104
Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.
Interpretation Response Details
Response Publish Date:
Company Name:
Individual Name:
Location State: MO Country: US
View the Interpretation Document
Response text:
April 13, 1983
Mr. William J. Lasley
Flanigan & McCanse
400 Grant
Carthage, Missouri 64836
Dear Mr. Lasley:
This refers to your letter of March 18, 1983, in which you ask several question about a 1978
accident involving an oil pipeline owned by the Shell Pipeline Corporation. Your letter was
referred to us by the Federal Railroad Administration.
First, you asked whether the pipeline company has a duty to test the pipe. The applicable
regulations for interstate oil pipelines in effect at the time of the accident (49 CFR Part 195)
require that after March 31,
1970, new, relocated, or replaced pipe be hydrostatically tested (§§195.300 and 195.401(c)).
However, this requirement may not apply to the pipe involved in the accident because the accident
report indicates the pipeline was constructed circa 1920.
In 1978, electrical tests for purposes of corrosion control were mandatory under §§195.414 and
195.416. The accident report states that the pipeline was cathodically protected, in which case
annual testing was required by §195.416(a) and a record of the testing must be kept under
§195.404(b)(2).
In regard to observations for leaks, under §195.412 pipeline operators were required to inspect
rights-of-way every 2 weeks and under §195.404(b)(2) a record must be kept of the inspections.
There has never been a specific requirement in Part 195 that operators notify land owner in the
event of an accident. However, since July 1980, §195.440 requires that operators have a continuing
public educational program to facilitate prompt response to pipeline emergencies and under
§195.402(e) (7) operators must notify public officials of emergencies on their systems. These rules
and related requirements expanded more general rules relating to operating procedures in normal,
abnormal, and emergency situations that were in effect in 1978 under §195.402(a) (See Amendment
195-15; 44 FR 41197, July 16, 1979). You should review the operator’s procedures established in
conformance with §195.402(a) in 1978 for specifics about the steps to be taken in response to an
accident.
The report you have sent to us is the only report that was required by this agency for the Shell
pipeline accident. We do not know of any other laws that would have required submission of
information about the accident.
I trust this response is helpful to you.
Sincerely, Original Sign By Richard L. Beam Associate Director for
Pipeline Safety Regulation
Materials Transportation Bureau
March 29, 1983
Mr. William J. Lasley
Law Offices, Flanigan & McCanse
400 Grant
Carthage, Missouri 64836
Dear Mr. Lasley:
Thank you for your recent letter with attachments concerning a pipeline oil leak near Sarcoxie,
Missouri on
October 12, 1978.
The Department of Transportation's responsibility for regulation of pipeline safety has been
transferred from the Federal Railroad Administration to the Research and Special Programs
Administration. We have forwarded your correspondence to them and asked that you receive a prompt
reply.
Sincerely,
J. W. Walsh
Associate Administrator for Safety