Interpretation Response #PI-15-0010 ([Alaska Gasline Development Corporation] [Mr. Keith Meyer])
Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.
Interpretation Response Details
Response Publish Date:
Company Name: Alaska Gasline Development Corporation
Individual Name: Mr. Keith Meyer
Location State: AK Country: US
View the Interpretation Document
Response text:
PI-15-0010
Mr. Keith Meyer
President
Alaska Gasline Development Corporation
3201 C Street, Suite 200.
Anchorage AK 99503
Dear Mr. Meyer:
In a letter to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) dated October 16, 2015, Exxon Mobil Alaska LNG (Exxon Mobil) requested a two-part interpretation of 49 CFR 192.327(f)(2) to determine whether Exxon Mobil could use the cover requirement in § 192.327(f)(2) for a pipeline in Alaska's Cook Inlet. PHMSA understands that Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (Alaska Gasline) has purchased the project that was the subject of the October 16, 2015, letter. This letter is being addressed to you as the new owner/developer.
Exxon Mobil stated in their letter that the Alaska LNG project is being developed to condition Alaska North Slope natural gas and transport it to a tidewater port near Nikiski on the Cook Inlet for liquefaction and loading to liquefied natural gas (LNG) marine vessels. The proposed project facilities include a liquefaction facility on the eastern shore of Cook Inlet in the Nikiski area of the Kenai Peninsula, which will be supplied by an approximately 1,287 km (800-mile), large-diameter natural gas pipeline from the North Slope.
PHMSA understands that Alaska Gasline is now leading the design and engineering of the project facilities, including a large-diameter gas transmission pipeline that will cross the Cook Inlet in Alaska. Exxon Mobil Alaska LNG sought confirmation that:
- The Cook Inlet is considered "Offshore" for purposes of 49 CFR Part 192; and
- Section 192.327(f)(2) details the cover requirements for the pipeline segment that crosses the Cook Inlet.
In response to the first question, Exxon Mobil correctly notes that PHMSA has previously issued an interpretation that the Cook Inlet waters are considered "Offshore." In a September 16, 1997, letter of interpretation (#PI-97-010) to Mr. R.J. Redweik, Staff Environmental Engineer, Shell Western E&P Inc., PHMSA stated:
The pipeline facilities are subject to Part 195 requirements because, for purposes of the pipeline safety regulations, we do not consider the facilities to be located onshore. Although the pipeline safety regulations do not define onshore, offshore is defined in § 195.3 as being "beyond the line of ordinary low water along that portion of the coast of the United States that is in direct contact with the open seas and beyond the line marking the seaward limit of inland waters." The facilities are located in the waters of Cook Inlet, which average a depth of 100 feet, 35 foot tides, and 7 knot currents. Cook Inlet is in direct contact with the open seas, as evidenced by tides and currents. Recent pipeline safety legislation and regulations have focused on the potential hazards to navigation posed by submerged pipeline facilities. Thus, our intent in delineating onshore from offshore waters is to focus on waters where submerged pipeline facilities pose a risk to the public and the environment. The pipeline facilities in Cook Inlet pose a safety hazard to navigational traffic.
PHMSA had come to the same conclusion in an earlier May 19, 1997 letter of interpretation to Mr. Redweik (#PI-97-010), noting that the Coast Guard – which shares similar concerns about hazards to navigation – treats the Cook Inlet as "offshore" rather than "inland waters."
For the reasons stated above, PHMSA continues to classify the Cook Inlet as "Offshore." PHMSA acknowledges that the May 19, 1997, and September 16, 1997, interpretations address Part 195, not Part 192. However, neither Part defines the term "Onshore" and both include identical definitions of the term "Offshore," and the 1997 interpretation therefore is fully applicable to Part 192.1 For the reasons stated above, under the definition used in both Part 192 and Part 195, the Cook Inlet is "Offshore" – the inlet lies beyond the line of ordinary low water along the portion of the coast of the United States that is in direct contact with the open seas, and is beyond the line marking the seaward limit of inland waters.
Additionally, the conditions in the Cook Inlet are similar to open-sea operating conditions. Recent measurements from three localities on the Cook Inlet: Nikiski, Alaska; Seldovia, Alaska; and Tesoro Pier, Cook Inlet, Alaska, show that during September 2016, the Cook Inlet averaged tides of 20 feet, winds of 5 knots, wind gusts that can reach above 20 knots, and currents in excess of 5 knots.2 Therefore, pursuant to previous PHMSA letters of interpretations and the current conditions in the Cook Inlet, the Cook Inlet waters are appropriately classified as "Offshore."
As to the second question whether cover requirements in § 192.327(f)(2) apply to the pipeline segment for the Alaska LNG project. Section 192.327 states, in relevant part:
§ 192.327 Cover.
(a) ...
(f) All pipe installed offshore, except in the Gulf of Mexico and its inlets, under water not more than 200 feet (60 meters) deep, as measured from the mean low tide, must be installed as follows:
(1) ...
(2) Pipe under water at least 12 feet (3.66 meters) deep must be installed so that the top of the pipe is below the natural bottom, unless the pipe is supported by stanchions, held in place by anchors or heavy concrete coating, or protected by an equivalent means.
Per the interpretation #PI-97-010, the Cook Inlet waters average 100 feet in depth, which is less than 200 feet; therefore, PHMSA's cover requirement in § 192.327(f)(2) applies. Further, a pipeline crossing Cook Inlet – whether installed below the natural bottom or supported by stanchions, held in place by anchors or heavy concrete coating, as described by § 192.327(f)(2) – would also be required to meet all crossing and depth of cover requirements of any other agency with permitting authority for navigable offshore waters, such as the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.
I hope this interpretation has been helpful. If we can be of further assistance, please contact Tewabe Asebe at 202-366-5523.
Sincerely,
Cameron H. Satterthwaite
Acting Director
Office of Standards and Rulemaking
cc: Mr. Rick Noecker
PHMSA Filing Coordinator
Alaska LNG Project
Pipeline Engineering, 237 4th Ave SW, Calgary, AB T2P OH6, CANADA
TAsebe: jmd:64046:03-16-17
Cc: PHP-30:OfficialFile:Sharepoint:Webpage
T:/Interps/Open/Alaska LNG: Alaska LNG-PI-15-0010-10-16-2015-Part 192.327
1 Compare 49 CFR 192.3 with 49 CFR 195.2 ("Offshore means beyond the line of ordinary low water along that portion of the coast of the United States that is in direct contact with the open seas and beyond the line marking the seaward limit of inland waters.").
2 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Tides and Currents Map, State of Alaska – Nikiski Station, Alaska, and Seldovia Station, Alaska. Available at http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/map/ (Site last visited September 22, 2016); See also 2016 Current Tables, Western Alaska: Icy Bay to The Bearing Sea – Tesoro Pier, Cook Inlet, Alaska. Pages 112-115. Approved by the United States Coast Guard.