USA Banner

Official US Government Icon

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure Site Icon

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation Icon United States Department of Transportation United States Department of Transportation

Interpretation Response #PI-78-0106

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: FL Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

September 21, 1978

Mr. Warren McDonald, President
Tampa Pipe Line Corporation
P.O. Box 19201
Tampa, Florida 33686

Dear Mr. McDonald:
We have received a letter from Gonzalo Ancira of Ancira Engineering Services, Inc., in response to
our letter to you dated July 21, 1978, outlining proposed requirements your Corporation must meet
to properly inhibit stress-corrosion cracking on the Tampa-Bartow anhydrous ammonia pipeline. Mr.
Ancira's letter indicates that you have no objection to these requirements.

In view of the above, please be advised that the order dated July 9, 1978, prohibiting transport of
the commodity in the proposed manner is hereby lifted as long as the requirements in our July 21
letter are met.

Mr. Ancira raised the question about the Department's regulatory jurisdiction over the pipeline. We
believe
the pipeline is engaged in foreign commerce, and thus subject to 49 CFR 195, because the only two
consignees
on the pipeline purchase the commodity directly from a foreign source and there are no other
deliveries made
to or from the terminal tanks used to store the commodity.
Sincerely, SIGNED
Cesar De Leon Associate Director for Pipeline Safety Regulation Materials Transportation
Bureau

Ancira Engineering Services, Inc. Suite 228
Hamilton Hotel
P.O. Box 480
Laredo, Texas 78040

August 7, 1978

Mr. Cesar de Leon
Associate Director for Pipeline Safety Reg.
Material Transportation Bureau
Department of Transportation
Washington, D. C. 20590

Dear Mr. de Leon:

With reference to your letter dated July 2, 1978 to Mr. Warren McDonald, Tampa Bay Pipeline
Corporation, we would like to call your attention the following observations in the same sequence
as your letter.

Tampa Bay Pipeline Corporation will monitor the water content of the Anhydrous Ammonia and will not
accept ammonia for shippment which does not meet the Federal requirement of 0.2% water content.
Tampa, however; will not be permitted to alter the quality of the product without consent from the
shipper and so far the shipper has advised that they have provisions for injecting water into the
ammonia system themselves.

Tampa Bay Pipeline Corporation has contracted the Thornton Laboratories of Tampa, Fla. to run
analysis and monitor all ammonia shipments.

The proposed prescribed requirements as outlined in your letter will be meet as follows:

1 - Water content will be 0.20 percent.

2 - Carrier is providing a monitor system and run the necessary analysis of each shipment insure
that the shipper has complied with thas requirement.

3 - The carrier has prepared and established written proceedures of the pipeline system in
compliance with 195.402 of the minimum Federal Safety Standards for liquid pipelines.

Tampa Bay Pipeline accepts full responsibility for the quality of product to be transported and all
product not meeting said requirement will not be accepted for shipment.

In reviewing the minimum Federal Safety Standars for liquid pipelines with our legal department, it
was called to our attention that under subpart A- General 195.1 scope, our pipeline is intrastate
and you should
not have any jurisdiction if jou claim jurisdiction based on foreign commerce of hazardous
material, our legal departament claims that no such foreign commerce exists between the carrier and
the shipper nameley (Tampa-RoysterGrace). The fact that some of the ammonia is of foreign origen
constitutes foreign commerce at the port of entry between the shippers storage and thevessel making
the delivery from a foreign source.

Our legal departament advises us that Tampa Bay Pipeline is in no way involved in foreign commerce,
if we are, please advise in writting how we can be classified as such.

Tampa Bay will comply with all Federal regulations for safety purposes regardless of whether or not
we are under your jurisdiction or not.

Yours very truly, Gonzalo Ancira

July 21, 1978

Mr. Warren McDonald
Tampa Pipe Line Corporation
P.O. Box 19201
Tampa, Florida 33686

Dear Mr. McDonald:

We have received a letter from Gonzalo Ancira of Ancira Engineering Services, Inc., Laredo, Texas,
in response to our Order dated June 9, 1978, concerning the potential stress corrosion cracking
problem on the proposed Tampa-Bartow anhydrous ammonia pipeline. His letter indicates that the
Tampa Pipeline Corporation's plan to inhibit stress corrosion cracking in the pipeline amounts to
submitting certifications from the shippers that the water content of the commodity to be
transported will not be below 0.30 percent.

We do not find that this proposed plan provides an acceptable means of assuring protection against
stress corrosion cracking because (1) the means of protection would be under the control of the
shipper rather than the carrier and, (2) since water content is subject to change, the plan should
include a way to satisfactorily monitor the percentage of water content and to maintain a proper
percentage.

We propose to prescribe the following requirements to properly inhibit stress corrosion cracking on
the
Tampa-Bartow pipeline:

1.          The water content of anhydrous ammonia transported in the pipeline must not be less
than 0.20 percent by volume.

2.          The carrier shall monitor the water content and add water into the system if necessary.

3.          The operating procedures prepared under Section 195.402 must include provisions for
monitoring and maintaining water content.

You are invited to submit comments on these proposed requirements by August 31, 1978, so that we
may consider them before issuing a final order on the manner in which anhydrous ammonia may be
transported in the Tampa-Bartow pipeline.

Consistent with Mr. Ancira's proposed action and Section 195.10, you might wish to make
arrangements with the shippers to meet proposed requirements 1 and 2 above (e.g., by checking the
water content of each shipment prior to its delivery to the pipeline). Doing so, however, would not
relieve the Tampa Pipeline Corporation of any responsibility for compliance.

Sincerely, SIGNED
Cesar De Leon
Associate Director for
Pipeline Safety Regulation Materials Transportation Bureau

Ancira Engineering Services, Inc. Suite 228
Hamilton Hotel
P.O. Box 480
Laredo, Texas 78040

June 27, 1978

Mr. Cesar De Leon
Associate Director For Pipeline
Safety Regulation
Material Transportation Bureau
Department of Transportation
Washington, D.C. 20590

Subject:           Tampa Bay Pipeline Corp.
Provision for Inhibit Stress Corrosion.

Dear Mr. De Leon:

Please refer to your letter dated June 9, 1978 to Mr. Warren McDonald on subject matter. We have
fully complied with the inhibitor requirement by requiring that all shippers, namely W.R. Grace and
Royster furnish the anhydrous ammonia with the inhibitor already in it.

We are here-by submitting to you, a copy of such compliance in writting by W.R. Grace, Royster
certification will follow.

As soon as such certification is in your power, we will request that you kindly remove the
restriction placed on our pipeline system. Or advice if there is any other certification you may
require from us.

Yours Very Truly, Gonzalo Ancira

Agricultural Chemicals Group
W.R. Grace & Co. P.O. Box 630
Wilmington, N.C. 28401

June 21, 1978

Mr. W. R. McDonald
Tampa Bay Pipeline
c/o Tampa Pipeline Corporation
P. O. Box 19201
Tampa, Florida               33616

Dear Warren:

Subject:           W. R. Grace Ammonia Terminal, Port Sutton

This is to certify that the ammonia received for storage and reshipment through the subject
terminal will at all times be 0.30% minimum water content per our anhydrous ammonia agricultural
grade product specifications.

Sincerely,
W. R. Grace & Co.
James L. Smith
Chief Engineer
June 9
Mr. Warren McDonald
Tampa Pipe Line Corporation
P.O. Box 19201
Tampa, Florida 33686

Dear Mr. McDonald:
This refers to our letter dated April 11, 1973, to Mr. Shields D. Clark III, West Coast Engineering
Corporation
(copy enclosed), regarding a proposed anhydrous ammonia pipeline between Tampa and Bartow, Florida.

Our investigation indicates that apparently no provision has been made to inhibit stress-corrosion
cracking, a problem of particular concern with this type of pipeline. For this reason, we have
determined that the transportation of the commodity in the proposed manner would be unduly
hazardous. Therefore, in accordance with 49 CFR 195.6(a), you are hereby ordered not to transport
the commodity in the proposed manner until further notice.

Please submit your plans to address the stress-corrosion cracking problem.
Sincerely, SIGNED
Cesar De Leon
Associate Director for
Pipeline Safety Regulation
Pipeline Safety Regulation
Materials Transportation Bureau

Regulation Sections

Section Subject
195.1 Which pipelines are covered by this Part?