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-80-0102

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: DC Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

Department of Transportation
Research and Special Programs Administration
Washington, D.C. 20590

June 16, 1980
Mr. Gary L. Hammons
556 Main Avenue
Durango, Colorado 81301

Dear Mr. Hammons:
Thank you for your letter of April 10, 1980, in which you requested answers to two questions
regarding rights-of-way for pipelines.

In answer to your first question regarding any laws or regulations that specify minimum distances
between pipelines, 49
CFR 192.325 and 195.250 contain the Department of Transportation's requirements for clearance of
underground gas
and liquid pipelines, respectively. Copies of sections 192.325 and 195.250 are enclosed for your
information. These
clearance requirements would not, under most conceivable circumstances, restrict the use of a
single right-of-way for
multiple pipelines.

To answer your second question, the Department's regulations do not prevent pipeline operators from
using multiple parallel rights-of-way. The selection of a pipeline's right-of-way is made by the
owner of the pipeline, subject to any State or local controls or approval by the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission in the case of an interstate gas transmission pipeline. It would appear that
a definitive answer to your second question would involve legal counseling regarding individual
rights of condemnation under State law. An attorney versed in these matters could best answer your

I hope this information is a benefit to you. If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.
Sincerely, SIGNED
Melvin A. Judah
Acting Associate Director
for Pipeline Safety Regulation
for Pipeline Safety Regulation
Materials Transportation Bureau
Southwest Exchange, Inc.
Real Estate Business Opportunities
556 Main Ave.
Durango, Colorado 81301

April 10, 1980

Mr. Ceasar DeLeon, Associate Director
Pipeline Safety Regulations
Department of Transportation
400 7th St. S. W.
Washington, D. C.           20590

Dear Mr. DeLeon:
After having been referred to several offices, I have been given your name as the person who can
answer my questions.

I live on 36.5 acres seven miles west of Durango, Colorado. There is a 75 foot Northwest Pipeline
right-of-way across my property that contains a 26 inch, high pressure natural gas line.

I am now being approached by agents of Mapco who wish to purchase an additional 50 foot
right-of-way paralleling the Northwest right-of-way. There is also probably going to be a carbon
dioxide pipe line in the near future following this same general route. Obviously, if pipeline
companies are allowed to take 50 - 75 foot parallel easements it could cause severe hardship and
loss of real estate value to me and all of the other private landowners along the way. These lines
will also be traversing the Ute Indian Reservation and the San Juan National Forest.

With this background, I would appreciate the answers to the following questions:

1.           Are there any laws or regulations specifying minimum distances between the actual
pipelines that could make it impossible for all of these pipelines to be constructed within the 75
foot Northwest Pipeline right-of-way?

2.           Under these circumstances, could Mapco and then future contractors be permitted to
condemn additional parallel right-of-ways ad infinitum?

My neighbors and I have no desire to obstruct any pipeline, particularly now with our current
energy situation. However, we would hope that they could all be constructed within the existing
right-of-way in order to limit financial losses to the landowners involved and to limit
environmental damage to this beautiful mountain and forest country in southwest Colorado.
Yours truly,
Gary L. Hammons

Regulation Sections

Section Subject
192.325 Underground clearance