You are here

Interpretation Response #PI-77-017

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

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date: 07-05-1977
Company Name: Williams Brothers Engineering Company    Individual Name: Leo R. Kenyon
Location state: OK    Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

Jul 5, 1977

Mr. Leo R. Kenyon
Williams Brothers Engineering Company
6600 S. Yale Avenue
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74136

Dear Mr. Kenyon:

This is in response to your letter of February 25, 1977, in which you requested our definition and advice on three questions concerning Section 192.5 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The following information is furnished in answer to your questions:

  1. A discussion of the reasons for determining 10 or less buildings for Class 1 location and 46 or less buildings for Class 2 location are contained in Notice 70-4, Docket No. OPS-3D (enclosed). The study which formed the basis for these determinations is also enclosed.
  2. "Normal use" is interpreted to mean the activity that is ordinarily engaged in on the premises. The frequency of normal use is a factor to consider in determining whether the use of a building or outside area creates a risk which is similar enough to the risk to the areas mentioned in §192.5(d)(2)(ii) to warrant application of Class 3 standards.
  3. Intended for "human occupancy" is interpreted to mean that the building concerned is used for a purpose involving the presence of humans.

Enclosed are copies of the Office of Pipeline Safety Operations' Advisory Bulletin, Nos. 71-4, 73- 11, 75-4, and 76-11, which contain interpretations of specific examples which may be of assistance.

If we can be of further assistance, please let me know.


Cesar DeLeon
Acting Director
Office of Pipeline
Safety Operations

Regulation Sections

Section Subject
§ 192.5 Class locations