Interpretation Response #PI-83-007 ([Kim R. Henry])

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

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date: 05/19/1983

Company Name:

Individual Name: Kim R. Henry

Location State: CA Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

Mr. Kim R. Henry

10101 Slater Avenue, Suite 204

Fountain Valley, CA 92708

Dear Mr. Henry:

This refers to your letter of May 10, 1983, asking whether the requirements of 49 CFR Part 192 would apply to a proposed hydrogen gas pipeline to be owned and operated by the Champlin Petroleum Company. The pipeline will begin at a Shell refinery in Los Angeles and extend two miles to a Champlin refinery.

I have issued the enclosed pipeline safety interpretation in response to your inquiry. It provides that the pipeline in question would not be subject to Part 192.

Sincerely,

Richard L. Beam

Associate Director for

Pipeline Safety Regulation

Enclosure

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU PIPELINE SAFETY REGULATORY INTERPRETATION

Note: This pipeline safety regulatory interpretation applies a particular rule to a particular set of facts and circumstances, and as such, is binding only on the operator to whom the interpretation is specially addressed.

SECTION: 192.1, 192.3

SUBJECT: Part 192 Jurisdiction Over Proposed Hydrogen Pipeline

FACTS: Champlin Petroleum Company plans to purchase hydrogen gas from Shell Oil Company for use in a Champlin refinery. Shell will deliver the gas to Champlin at a dehydration plant located inside a Shell refinery where the gas is produced. From the dehydration plant, the gas will be transported by Champlin in its own pipeline, which traverses public and private lands for two miles inside Los Angles before reaching the Champlin refinery.

QUESTION: Is the proposed Champlin pipeline subject to Part 192?

INTERPRETATION: As provided in §192.1, Part 192 applies to the "transportation of gas", which is defined in §192.3 to mean "the gathering, transmission, or distribution of gas by pipeline... in or affecting interstate on foreign commerce." Under the definitions in §192.3 of "gathering line" and "service line" (which is a "distribution line"), the transportation of gas that is subject to Part 192 begins at the outlet of a production facility and runs to the point where ownership of the gas passes to the consumer, or to where gas has been sold and delivered to the consumer. Under the facts, Champlin is the consumer. Both the sale and delivery of hydrogen gas to Champlin occur before the gas enters Champlin's pipeline. Therefore, the pipeline transportation of gas to be conducted by Champlin falls outside the jurisdiction of Part 192. Richard L. Beam

Associate Director for

Pipeline Safety Regulation

Materials Transportation Bureau

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU PIPELINE SAFETY REGULATORY INTERPRETATION

Note: This pipeline safety regulatory interpretation applies to all operators that are subject to the rule under Federal or State law.

SECTION: 192.179

SUBJECT: Valve Spacing

FACTS: None.

QUESTION: How far apart may sectionalizing block valves be placed on an onshore transmission line being constructed in a Class 1 area?

INTERPRETATION: Section 192.179(a)(4) provides that "Each point on the pipeline in a Class 1 location must be within 10 miles of a valve." A spacing of not more than 20 miles between valves will result in each point on the pipeline between valves being within 10 miles of a valves. This allowable spacing is supported by the language of the proposed rule (35 FR 5713; April 8, 1970) upon which §192.179 is based, which stated that "Each sectionalizing block valve on a transmission line must be installed at a spacing at a spacing not to exceed 20 miles within areas conforming to Class 1 Location...."

Richard L. Beam

Associate Director for

Pipeline Safety Regulation

Materials Transportation Bureau

Dr. Robert L. Paullin

Associate Director

Office of Operations & Enforcement

Department of Transportation

2100 2nd Street, S.W.

Washington, DC 20590

RE: D.O.T. Regulations Part 192.179

Dear Dr. Paullin:

Questions have developed on the interpretation of valve spacing under 192.179, and we would like to have an official interpretation, hopefully as soon as possible. We have a pipeline project going in within several weeks, and the valve spacing questions will be part of the problems with that job.

The opening wording of 192.179 states that each transmission line must have sectionalizing block valves spaced as follows: Under sub (4) it states that each point on the pipeline in a Class 1 location must be within ten miles of a valve.

A case of ambiguity exists as to whether the actual spacing between valves along a transmission line should be ten, or twenty miles. As worded under (4) above, it could be construed that if one valve is within ten miles, the requirements have been met. On the other hand, if the opening wording of 192.179 referring to sectionalizing block valves it could also be argued that each of the two valves required to sectionalize must be within ten miles of any point on the transmission line.

Please provide our office with an interpretation as soon a possible, in view of our imminent construction work where this will be arising.

Yours truly,

A. J. Schellenberg, P.E.

Lead Gas Engineer

Regulation Sections