Interpretation Response #PI-73-016 ([Borough of Metuchen] [Martin A. Spritzer])

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

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date: 06/22/1973

Company Name: Borough of Metuchen

Individual Name: Martin A. Spritzer

Location State: NJ Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

June 22, 1973

Martin A. Spritzer, Esq.

Borough of Metuchen

Middlesex County

P. O. Box 567

Metuchen, New Jersey 08840

Dear Mr. Spritzer:

Your letter of May 7, 1973, acknowledges our letter of April 9,
1973, in which we advised that the Office of Pipeline Safety
(OPS) is not authorized to prescribe the location or routing of
any pipeline. However, you call attention to §195.210 which you
say definitely refers to pipeline location in regard to
residential areas, and you ask what recourse an aggrieved person
would have for interpretation and enforcement of that section.

Section 195.210(a) places a requirement on a carrier to select a
right-of-way that avoids "as far as practicable, areas containing
private dwellings, industrial buildings, and places of public
assembly." Section 195.210(b) prohibits location of a pipeline
within 50 feet of certain buildings and assembly places unless
additional cover is provided.

The requirements of §195.210 are limitations with which a carrier
must comply in placing a new pipeline. This section, however,
gives our office only limited authority to determine the location
of pipelines. Generally, we do not "approve" the location of
pipelines. The regulations have no procedure for granting
licenses, but §195.210 does require that pipelines be located
away from dwellings "as far as practicable." If it is not"practicable" to locate pipelines away from dwellings--in other
words, if there is no alternative open area--then 12 inches of
additional cover must be added. What is "practicable" is a
question of judgment and all facts must be evaluated.

The OPS does not review individual pipeline proposals prior to
construction unless some specific safety problem is brought to
our attention. In the event a person believes a carrier is not
complying with any requirement of 49 CFR Part 195, he may
communicate all the known facts to this office for appropriate
action.

For an alleged violation of §195.210(a), the person
reporting should state in what respects, in his opinion, the
carrier's right-of-way selection has not avoided, as far as
practicable, buildings and places of public assembly.

Please contact us if you have any further questions in this regard.

Sincerely,

Joseph C. Caldwell

Director

Office of Pipeline Safety

Regulation Sections