# CDX Gas — Pipeline Safety Interpretation

**Citation:** PI-09-0002  
**Type / status:** guidance / guidance  
**Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration  
**Effective:** Not stated  
**Published:** 2009-07-14

PI-09-0002 response to CDX Gas concerning 192.8.

## Document text

<<<PAGE 1>>>

U.S. Department
of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materiais Safety
Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, D.C. 20590
JUL 1 42009
Mr. Greg Schrab
HSE Coordinator
CDXGas
14800 Landmark Blvd, Suite 400
Dallas, TX 75254
Dear Mr. Schrab:
In a letter to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) dated
September 19,2008, you requested an interpretation of the applicability of the Federal pipeline
safety regulations in 49 CFR Part 192 to your Slaytonville natural gas pipeline. You stated that
the Slaytonville line is an eight-mile line connecting Central Station, a gas processing and
compression facility, to the CenterPoint gas transmission pipeline. You explained that, contrary
to a recent determination by the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission that the Slayton ville line is a
transmission line, you believe that the Slaytonville line is an "incidental gathering" line under
section 2.2(a)(l)(E) of API RP 80 as incorporated in Part 192 and, therefore, unregulated since it
is located entirely within a Class 1 area. You requested a final determination from PHMSA as to
whether the Slaytonville line is a regulated gas transmission line or a non-regulated incidental
gathering line.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq., PHMSA prescribes and enforces standards and regulations
that apply to the gathering, transmission, and distribution of gas by pipeline. A gathering line is
defined in 49 CFR § 192.3 as "a pipeline that transports gas from a current production facility to
a transmission line or main." That same section defines a transmission line as "a pipeline, other
than a gathering line, that: (1) Transports gas from a gathering line or storage facility to a
distribution center, storage facility, or large volume customer that is not downstream from a
distribution center; (2) operates at a hoop stress of 20 percent or more of SMYS; or (3) transports
gas within a storage field."
On March 15, 2006, PHMSA issued a Final Rule that defined a "regulated gathering line" and
set forth the requirements that apply to regulated gathering lines (71 FR 13289). The rule
adopted API RP 80 with certain limitations. Section 192.8 now provides as follows:
§ 192.8 determined?
How are onshore gathering lines and regulated onshore gathering lines
(a) An operator must use API RP 80 (incorporated by reference, see § 192.7), to
determine if an onshore pipeline (or part of a connected series of pipelines) is an
onshore gathering line. The determination is subject to the limitations listed
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety. provides written clarification of the Regulations (49 CFR
Parts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect the agency's current application of the regulations to the specific facts
presented by the person requesting the clarification. Interpretations do not create legally-enforceable rights or obligations and are provided to
help the public understand how to comply with the regulations.

<<<PAGE 2>>>

2
below. After making this determination, an operator must determine if the
onshore gathering line is a regulated onshore gathering line under paragraph (b) of
this section.
(1) The beginning of gathering, under section 2.2(a)(l) of API RP 80, may not
extend beyond the furthermost downstream point in a production operation as
defined in section 2.3 of API RP 80. This furthermost downstream point does not
include equipment that can be used in either production or transportation, such as
separators or dehydrators, unless that equipment is involved in the processes of
"production and preparation for transportation or delivery of hydrocarbon gas"
within the meaning of "production operation."
(2) The endpoint of gathering, under section 2.2(a)(I)(A) of API RP 80, may not
extend beyond the first downstream natural gas processing plant, unless the
operator can demonstrate, using sound engineering principles, that gathering
extends to a further downstream plant.
(3) If the endpoint of gathering, under section 2.2(a)(l)(C) of API RP 80, is
determined by the commingling of gas from separate production fields, the fields
may not be more than 50 miles from each other, unless the Administrator finds a
longer separation distance is justified in a particular case (see 49 CFR § 190.9).
(4) The endpoint of gathering, under section 2.2(a)(l)(D) of API RP 80, may not
extend beyond the furthermost downstream compressor used to increase gathering
line pressure for delivery to another pipeline.
While you correctly point out that the rule did not expressly adopt a limitation on the fifth
possible endpoint of gathering in section 2.2(a)(1 )(E) of API RP 80, PHMSA considers this to be
a drafting error that does not reflect PHMSA's intent. In the Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking issued on October 3,2005, PHMSA expressed its intent to "assure gathering line
determinations do not stray significantly from PHMSA' s historic interpretations of gathering or
do not abuse the "furthermost downstream" concept." (70 FR 57540)
Historically PHMSA has not accepted the incidental gathering designation. Based on the
pressures at which these lines typically operate and the fact that they share maintenance and
inspection needs with high pressure transmission lines, PHMSA has historically treated these
lines as regulated transmission lines and did not intend to make any change in the rule. Indeed,
the intent of Congress in mandating the rulemaking was to bring additional pipeline mileage into
the regulations, not to deregulate lines.
In our experience, the majority of operators treat these lines as regulated transmission lines and
PHMSA believes they will continue to do so. Although incidental gathering designations are
currently permissible due to the drafting error and would apply to the Slaytonville line based on
the description you provided, PHMSA is currently considering whether a rule amendment should
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety, provides written clarification of the Regulations (49 CFR
Parts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect the agency's current application of the regulations to the specific facts
presented by the person requesting the clarification. Interpretations do not create legaIIy-enforceable rights or obligations and are provided to
help the public understand how to comply with the regulations.

<<<PAGE 3>>>

3
be undertaken to correct the rule and propose adding a fifth limitation on API RP 80 which
would mean incidental gathering determinations are no longer permissible. Because PHMSA
may undertake such a rule amendment in the near future, operators should strongly consider
keeping incidental gathering designations to an absolute minimum and treating these lines as
regulated transmission lines.
In addition, be advised that because an incidental gathering line is a single connecting line and
not a system oflines, by definition it is limited to the first tie-in downstream of the processing or
compression facility even if that connection does not extend all the way to the large diameter
interstate line.
Finally, with respect to the beginning of gathering, the system maps you submitted as supporting
documentation incorrectly depict CDX's production operations as extending to the Central
Station. The relevant API RP 80 diagram (Fig. 2-6) clearly shows that gathering begins at the
terminus of production and transports gas to the processing, compression location depicted by
the schematic. Proper application of the definition for production in API RP 80, section 2.3 and
the supplemental definitions in section 2.4 indicate that the production operations in the CDX
system cease much further upstream, at least as far upstream as the facilities identified on the
map as "PODS". Further review of the equipment and processes would be necessary to make a
determination of the exact endpoint of production and beginning of gathering.
I hope that this information is helpful to you. If I can further assist you with this or any other
pipeline safety regulatory matter, please contact me at (202) 366-4046.
Sincerely,
·.4~2Y
sr~A.Gale
I Director, Office of Regulations
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety, provides written clarification of the Regulations (49 CFR
Parts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect the agency's current application of the regulations to the specific facts
presented by the person requesting the clarification. Interpretations do not create legally-enforceable rights or obligations and are provided to
help the public understand how to comply with the regulations.

<<<PAGE 4>>>

14800 Landmark Blvd, Suite 400, Dallas, TX 75254
Phone: 972-392-1880 Fax: 972-392-1881
September 19, 2008
Office of Pipeline Safety (PHP-30)
PHMSA
u.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, D.C. 20590-0001
RE: CDX Gas, LLC Request for Written Regulatory Interpretation
CDX Gas, LLC is requesting a written regulatory interpretation on one of its pipelines (the "Slaytonville
line") relative to 49 CFR Part 192 Gas Gathering Line Definition; Alternative Definition for Onshore
Lines and New Safety Standards, Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 50, March 15, 2006. CDX
Gas' determination, in accordance with the above-referenced regulation, is that the Slaytonville line is a
non-regulated Type A gathering line (see attached CDX Gas Arkoma Project determination document,
submitted to the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission [AOGC] and PHMSA Southwest Region during a
meeting on August 7, 2008). CDX is making this request as a result of the determination made by the
AOGC- that the Slaytonville line is a transmission line (see attached September 4, 2008 letter).
Before summarizing CDX Gas' determination as a basis for requesting PHMSA's written regulatory
interpretation, CDX Gas would like to call out several points in the September 4, 2008 AOGC letter:
• AOGC General Rule 0-17 and 49 CFR Part 192 regulations (paragraph #1): the AOGC
State regulation D-17 has no bearing on the determination (it simply references 49 CFR 192),
other than D-17 does give AOGC jurisdiction over all "pipeline operator" lines from the
wellhead to the custody transfer meter (which effectively focuses on exploration and production
company production and gathering lines), previously, the Arkansas Public Service Commission
was the only Arkansas State agency enforcing PHMSA regulations; the complete 3115/06 Federal
Register Final Rule, 49 CFR 192, and API RP-80 incorporated by reference are codified and do
have a bearing on the actual determination
• Onshore Gas Gathering F AQs (paragraph #2): F AQs, referenced by AOGC, are examples to
be used as guidance in interpreting an actual rule or regulation-they are not part of or
referenced in the Federal Register Final Rule, 49 CFR 192, or API RP-80 as incorporated by
reference, therefore these F AQs are not codified and do not have the force of regulations;
specifically, F AQ no. 5 referenced by the AOGC, was written and is apparently being interpreted
in a way that contradicts the Federal Register Final Rule (specifically, definition of the fifth
possible endpoint of gathering and "incidental gathering")
• Incidental Gathering (paragraph #5): it has not "been determined that while incidental
gathering MAY NOT be limited"; PHMSA DID NOT propose a limitation on the fifth possible
endpoint of gathering in 49 CFR 192, therefore incidental gathering under section 2.2( a)( 1 )(E) of
API RP-80 IS NOT limited by PHMSA as discussed in the 3/15/06 Federal Register Final Rule
(p. 13292, #5) and incidental gathering IS NOT being used to "circumvent a stated limitation"

<<<PAGE 5>>>

Please refer to the attached detennination document for the detailed basis for CDX Gas' detennination
that the Slaytonville line is a non-regulated Type A gathering line, not a transmission line. CDX Gas'
detennination, and this request for a written interpretation, is based primarily on p. 13292, #5 of the
3/15/06 Federal Register Final Rule (p. 7 of the attached detennination document) and the referenced
section 2.2.1.2.6 in API RP-80 (p. 5 of the attached detennination document):
• p. 13292, #5, Federal Register Final Rule: "We did not propose a limitation on the fifth
possible endpoint under section 2.2(a}(I)(E). This endpoint is the connection to another pipeline
downstream of the furthermost downstream endpoint under sections 2.2(a)(l)(A) through (D), or
in the absence of such an endpoint, the furthermost downstream production operation." "The
endpoint applies to connecting lines described as 'incidental gathering' under section 2.2.1.2.6 of
API RP-80. An example of a connecting line is a pipeline that runs from the outlet of a natural
gas processing plant to a transmission line. PHMSA considers 'incidental gathering' to include
only lines that directly connect a transmission line to one of the endpoints (A) through (D), as
limited by this fmal rule. Lines that connect a transmission line to one of these endpoints by way
of another facility are not considered 'incidental' gathering." (emphasis added)
• Section 2.2.1.2.6, API RP-80: "The pipeline moving the gas from the plant to another pipeline
is termed 'incidental gathering'. The 'incidental gathering' resumes at the plant outlet and
continues to the other pipeline connection. Incidental gathering may also occur when a
compressor is a potential endpoint". From a functional standpoint, this section of incidental
gathering line is no different from the rest of the gathering system. The definition, therefore,
includes recognition that gathering may continue downstream of the last endpoint identified by
processing, treatment, commingling, or compression activities to the connection with another
pipeline. (emphasis added)
As illustrated in Figure 2-6 of section 2.2.1.2.6 of API RP-80, as referenced in the 3/15/06 Federal
Register Final Rule, CDX Gas' production operation ends at the outlet of the Central Station. The
Slaytonville line then directly connects the Centerpoint transmission line to the Central Station, which
contains two possible endpoints of gathering (gas treatment and compression). Therefore, the
Slaytonville line is a "connecting" "incidental gathering" line, with the endpoint of gathering being its
connection with the downstream Centerpoint transmission line.
CDX Gas respectfully requests a written regulatory interpretation of its detennination that the
Slaytonville line is a non-regulated, Type A gathering line, in response to the AOGC detennination that it
is a transmission line. Please call me at (214) 242-1147 with any questions regarding this request.
Sincerely,
HSE Coordinator
cc:
Thomas B. Deal/Attorney, CDX Gas, LLC, 14800 Landmark Blvd., Suite 400, Dallas, TX 75254
Gary Looney/Assistant Director, Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission, EI Dorado Regional Office, 2215
West Hillsboro, EI Dorado, AR 71730
Patrick Gaume/Staff Engineer, Office of Pipeline Safety Southwest Region, 8701 South Gessner, Suite
1110, Houston, TX 77074

<<<PAGE 6>>>

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION
Direetor's 0fIke:
301 Natural Resourees Drive
Suite 102
Little Rode. AR 72205
Phone: (SOl) 683-5814
Fax: (SOl) 683-5818
http://www.aogc.atate.ar.us
Mlke8eebe
Governor
Lawrence Bengal
Director
£I Don4o ReaJoaal Oftke:
1115 W .. HIIIIbero
£I DeraIl., All 11730
PIootIe: (170) ~H5
FAX: (1'70) I62-IIt3
Fon SmiO JtecjouI 0fIIu;
;uo, PIIocaiI Avuae
,"" s.tG, All 7%903
no.e: (479) 646-6611
FAX: (m) ..... 7656
September 4, 2008
Mr. Greg Schrab
COX Gas, LLC
5485 Beltline Road, Ste 190
Dallas, TX 75254-7672
Re: Determination of Pipeline Status
Siaytonville Pipeline
Sebastian County, AR
Dear Mr. Schrab,
Commission staff conducted a review of the Hartford Pipeline System operated by COX
GAS, LLC on May 12,2008 in an effort to affirm regulatory compliance with AOGC
General Rule 0-17 and the applicable regulations contained within 49CFR Part 192.
DUring that review, I concluded that a portion of the pipeline system named as the
Siaytonville pipeline may be a transmission line and verbally communicated same to
you. My conclusion was based upon the limitations set forth under Part 192.8 (a) (4).
The Siaytonville pipeline is identified as the portion of your system downstream of the
final compressor station, which boost pressure and transports natural gas to another
pipeline at the custody transfer meter and is approximately eight (8) miles in length. In
further discussion, you indicated that the other pipeline is a transmission line operated
by Centerpoint Energy. Upon final review which included confirmation that the other
pipeline was indeed a transmission line and the Onshore Gas Gathering FAQs
published by PHMSA (specifically FAa no. 5), it was determined that the Siaytonville
line should be regulated as a Transmission Pipeline.
Subsequent emails and phone conversation ensued in which you expressed your
opinion that the Siaytonville line was not a transmission line and at your request I
agreed to discuss this matter with Mr. Patrick Gaume, PHMSA Liaison to AOGC.
Those discussions ended with the same decision that the Siaytonville line should be
regulated as a transmission line.
COMMISSION MEMBERS
Chad While. Chairman, Magnolia
W. Frank Morledge, Vice-Chairman, Forrest City
Charles Wohlford, Fort Smith • Bill Poynter. Texarkana
Mike Davis., Maanolia • Kenneth Williams. Jersey
Carolyn Pollan, Fort Smith· William L Dawkins. Jr., Fort Smith
Jerry Ungley. Smackover
An cqll1l opportunity employer

<<<PAGE 7>>>

Your further disagreement in this matter resulted in a meeting at AOGC office in Little
Rock on August 7, 2008 to discuss this issue. Present were Mr. Bowen and you
representing CDX, Mr. Gaume and myself. You presented your opinion of the
regulation and submitted both verbal and written arguments that were taken under
submission for review by representatives of PHMSA.
It has been determined that while incidental gathering may not be limited. It is clear that
in 192.8 (a) (4) a limitation has been placed on the endpoint of gathering and that
incidental gathering can not be used to circumvent a stated limitation. Therefore the
fact that the pipetine in question is downstream of the last compressor becomes the
main determinate and it is therefore a Transmission Line and shall be regulated
accordingly.
Any appeal of this determination should be filed in accordance with 49 CFR Part
190.11. Should you desire to file an appeal, please submit a copy of any appeal
request and aU supporting documentation to my attention at the EI Dorado Regional
Office.
Sincerely,
z1 jJ
~L i) ,<(}G,,\/
G"a,.J D. Loon/y
Assistant Director
EI Dorado Regional Office

<<<PAGE 8>>>

cox Gas. LLC Arkoma Project: Determination of Jurisdictional Status of Pipelines
Production (CtnSrJl StatIon 1114 YpttrMn)
Based on a site visit on May 12 and foIow-up communic:atiOns, the AOGC has agreed with COX Gas'
determination that the system of COX Gas, LlC wells through the screw compressors -PODS- and the Central
Station (Which includes separation, dehydration. and compression) in the Arkoma Project all meet the definition of
production per 192.8 (1) and Sections 2.3 and 3.1.4 of APt RP 80. Therefore, production does not end until the
outtet of the Central Station. Per AOGC Rule 0-17, COX Gas has submitted a map of these production facilities
(as well as the SIaytonviIIe pipeline they deliver into) to AOGC per Rule 0-17.
SlaytonyUtt Type A Gatbtrina Un! (Downttr!am of C!ntrJI Station)
COX Gas, LlC's $laytonville line (approximately 8 miles in length) transports gas from the end of production at the
Central Station to the connection with, and custody transfer to, the Centerpoint transmission line. Therefore, the
Staytonvilte line functions as a gathering line. because it transports gas from a current production facility to a
transmission line. Based on their May 12 site visit and fo8ow-up communications, AOGC notified COX Gas that
AOGC has determined that the $laytonville line is a transmission fine and wiD be under the jurisdiction of the
AOOC. During a follow-up meeting with Gary LooneylAOGC on July 17. Mr. Looney again stated he has forwarded
all communications to his PHMSA liaison, whose stance continues to be that Slaytonville is a transmission line.
COX Gas' determination remains that the Siaytonville line is a gathering line. The Staytonvllfe line operates at a
hoop stress of >20% SMYS. so per 192.8 it is a Type A gathering line. It is not a regulated gathering pipeline per
192.8 (b), because It does not lie within a Class 2, 3 or 4 location. The $laytonville line lies within a Class 1
location. because there are 10 or fewer buildings Intended for human occupancy within 220 yards on either side of
the centerline of any continuous 1-mile length of the pipeline (see details on class location below). COX Gas'
determination remains the SlaytonvHle line does not meet the definition of a transmission line in 192.3:
"TransmIssion line means a pipeline. other than a gathering line. that (1) Transports gas from a gathermg Ime or
storage facility to 8 distribution center. storage faCility, or itffge volume customer that IS not down-stream from a
distrIbution center; (2} operates at hoop stress of 20 pen;enl or more of SMVS: or (3) transports gas Wlthm a
storage field •
As defined and described above. the SJaytonvilte line functions as a gathering. not a transmission line, because it
transports gas from a production facility (Centrat Station) to a transmission line (Centerpoint). it does not transport
gas from a gathering line or storage facility to a distribution center, storage facitity, large votume customer, or within
a storage field.
The endpoint of gathering. and therefore the determInation of the Slaytonville line as a gathering. not transmission.
line. can pethap$ best be illustrated using Figure 8--2 from API RP SO. In accordance with API RP 80 2.2 (a) as
incorporated with limitations in 192.8 (a). the gathering function. including the end of gathering. of the Arkoma
Project can best be represented by the decision tree Figure B-2 (attached). As described above. the Central
Station is the furthermost downstream point in the Production Operation [2.2 (a) (1)J. and is also the location of the
furthermost downstream Gas Treatment Facility [2.2 (a) (1) (B)} and Gas Compression [2.2 (a) (1) (O)J. the outlet of
which would be the possible end of gathering. except. the compressor delivers dlrect1y into the SlaytonviJle line.
The SiaytonviIte line transports and connects to the Centerpoint transmission line, not a distribution center, storage
facility, large volume customer. or within a storage fietd as described above. Therefore, the gathering function
extends downstream to the point of connection with another pipeline [2.2(a)(1)(E)). and the furthermost downstream
point and end of gathering is the custody transfer connection with the Centerpoint transmission line.
The Slaytonville line may best be identifted as an -incidental gathering-line, as descrtbed in 49 CFR 192 Gas
Gathering line Definition; Alternative Definition for Onshore Unes and New Safety Standards, Final Rule (Federal
Register Vol. 71. No. 50, March 15. 2006; see attached pages):
'Under section 2.2(e}(1}(DJ, the fourth possible endpoint IS the outlet of the furthermost downstream compressor
station used to lower gathering nne operating pressure to facilitate deliveries into the pipe/me from prodUCtion
operations or to increase gatheting lme pressure for delivery mto another pipeline For conSIstency with our past
Inteq::,retations and current enforcement policy. we proposed to limit thiS endpoint to the outlet of a compressor
used to deliver gas to another pIpe/me. ~ (/I A 5. page 13292J.
I

<<<PAGE 9>>>

"Base<1on this clanficaJion. we believe the term 'another plp(l/ine' in section 2 2(a)(1J(D} 01 API RP 80 does nor
mean delivering to another gathenng line" (IV 5 b .. page 13296)
'We did not propose a limitation on the fifth pasS/bht endpoint under Section 2.2(aJ(1)(£:}. This endpoint is the
connection to another pIpeline downstream of the furthermost downstream endpoint under sectIOns 2. 2(a)(1 }(A)
through (0), or In the absence of such an endpomt the furthermost downsnam production operation The
endpoint applies to the connecting lines described as 'Incidental gathering. under SI1CtiOn 2.2. 1.2,6 of API RP 80
An example of a connecting line is a pipeline that rullS from the outlet of a natural gfJS processing plant to a
transmission fine. PHMSA c.onsk/fIrs 'incident" fPlfheriltfl' to Include only lines tJutt directly connect 1*
transmission line to one of the endpoints (A) through (OJ. as limited by this final rule' (/I.A 5., page r 3292)
Please refer to Figure 2-6-tncidental Gathering Downstream of an Identified Endpoint in section 2.2.1.2.6 of APt
RP 80 as referenoec:t in FlOat Rule 49 CFR 192. As described also using decision tree Figure B--2. the Central
Station represents two possible endpoints of gathering Identified in Figure 2-6: the furthermost downstream gas
treatment facility [2.2 (a) (1) (8» and gas oompressor [2.2 (a) (1) (0»). The SlaytonviUe line directly connects the
Centerpoint transmission line to !he Central Station. which contains these two possible endpoints of gathering.
Therefore. the Siaytonvilie line can be identified as a ~connecting· -incidental gathering" Ilne. with the endpoint of
gathering being its connection with the downstream Centerpoint transmission line. However. as stated in API RP
80. from a functional standpoint. there is no difference between incidental gathering and other gathering. so there is
no impact on COX Gas' determination that the SIaytonviUe line is a non-regulated Type A gathering line.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAas) are examples to be used as guidance in interpreting an actual rule or
regulation-they are not part of the actual rule or regulation and therefore have no legal standing. Nonetheless,
because AOGC initially referenced FAa #5 during their May 12 site visit and used it as the basis for their
determination. FAa #5 (attached) is also used to further illustrate the COX Gas Siaytonville line case as described
above. Additionally. per API RP-80 (2.6.2.1 Physical Parameters) line length and pressure are not factors that can
be used to determine the actual function and therefore the designation of a pipeline; the Federal Register Final
Rule and 49 CFR 192 clearly describe that both Type A gathering and transmission lines operate at pressures
resulting in a hoop stress of >20% SMYS. and line length is not used as a determining factor in the Final Rule or 49
CFR 192. As another point of reference. the COX Gas Slaytonvifte line is not a FERC-regulated interstate or
intrastate transmission pipeline (see attached narrative).
c .... LocatIon of §laytonville Type A Gathtrina Uo..
As documented on our system map. and reviewed and discussed with Gary Looney/AOGC during our July 17
meeting. there are a total of fourteen houses within 220 yards on either side of the centerline of the SlaytonviUe
pipeline, along the approximately 8 mile line length from the Central Station to the custody transfer point at the
Centerpoint Interconnect:
• There are six houses within any continuous 1 mile of the Slaytonville line near its termination at the
CentervDle Interconnect;
• There are fIVe houses within any continuous 1 mile of the SlaytonvUIe line in the area where it crosses
State Highway 252;
• There are three houses within any continuous 1 mile going farther south of State Highway 252 along the
Slaytonville pipeline (and including the southernmost house of the aforementioned group of fIVe houses).
• Finally. there is one house within any continuous 1 mile of the Slaytonville line in the area on the west side
of Gap Road, across from the T -interse<:tion of Gap Road with Diamondback Lane.
Therefore, the SlaytonviJie Type A gathering line lies entirely in a Class 1 location [per 1925 (a) and (b){ 1}' ::10
bulldlflgs Intended for human occupancy wlthm 220 yardS of its centerline atong any continUOUS 1-mlle lengthL SO it
is a non-regulated Type A gathering line. Per 192.9 <e, (3). if a Change in class location causes the Sfaytonvil!e line
to become a regulated gathering tine, COX wi" have 2 years to comply with the requirements of a regulated Type A
Gathering line.

<<<PAGE 10>>>

FERC Status of $laytonville Type A Gathering Un.
API RP 80 (Section 2.2.2.4), as incorporated into 192. states: "It was recognlzed that FERC or other agency
pipeline designations were not developed with pipeline safety as the regulatory purpose and as such may represent
and include concepts and assumptions that are not relevant to Pipeline Safety Act objectives". However. the
review of 49 U.S.C 60101.15 U.S.C. 717, and AQ8..08-01 befow show the inter.relationshlp between the definition
of pipelines from a pipeline safety perspective-based on their functionaf and operational characteristics-and from a
FERC or State PUC regulatory perspective.
The federal pipeline safety laws (49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) can for the definition of gathering lines as follows:
60101 (b) Gathering LlIles.-{1 HAY Not later than October 24. 1994, the Secretary shall prescnbe standards defIning
the term .. gathering lineM
•
(8) In defining "gathering line" for gas. the Secretary--
(I) Shall consider functional and operatiOnal characteristics of the hnes to be Included In the definition; and
(Ii j IS nol bound by a ctasslflCabon the CommIssion establishes under the Natural Gas Act (15 USC 71 7 at
seq )
The Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.) defines the transportation and sale of natural gas to be regulated
underFERC:
15 USC 717 (b) TransactIOns 10 whICh provIsions of chapter 3ppttCable
The provisions of this chapter shall apply to the transportation of natural gas .n mterstate commerce. 10 the sale
In Interstate commerce of natural gas for resale for ultImate publIC consumption for domestic, commercial,
Industrial, or any other use, and to natural...gas companies engaged In sucn transportatlon or sale and to the
ImportatIOn or exportation ot natural gas m foretgn commerce and (0 persons engaged 10 such Importahon Of
exportation but shalt not apply to any other transportation or sale of natural gas or to the local drstnbuhon of
natural gas or to the facilities used for such distribution or to the production or gathering of natural gas.
PHMSA has issued an Advisory Bulletin (A0B-08-01 - Direct Sales Pipelines Jurisdiction) stating that the Pipeline
Inspection, Protection. Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006 (PIPES Act) eliminated the former exception of direct
sales natural gas pipelines from the definition of an interstate gas pipeUne facility. The Federal pipeline safety laws
(49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) define an "interstate gas pipeline facility" as a facility subject to the jurisdictiOn of the
FERC under the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.). Section 7 of the PIPES Act changed this by eliminating
the exception of direct sales pipelines. As a result. direct sales gas transmission pipelines subject to FERC
jurisdiction formerly considered to be intrastate pipelines for purposes of the pipeline safety laws are now
considered to be interstate pipelines. If the line has a State certification from the State Public Utility Commission
(PUC) SUCh that the State PUC has regulatory jurisdictiOn over the rates and service of the line and is exercising it
(i.e. the Stale PUC is exercising economic regulatory jurisdiction, not FERC). that would be grounds for concluding
that the line is not subject to FERC jurisdiction and therefore can be regulated as an intrastate pipeline by a State
having a certlfication for gas under 49 U.S.C. 60105.
In the case of the Siaytonville pipeline. it functions and operates as a gathering line from a safety perspective as
called for in 49 U.S.C 60101 and regulated in 192 (including the incorporated APt RP SO)-it transports gas from a
production facility (Central Station) to a transmission line (Centerpoint transmission line). Uk.wlse, under1S
U.S.C. 111, the SIaytonville fine is not n.guJat.d by FERC or the State PUC (APSe), because it Is the
gathering of natural gas-it'. function ctoe. not include transporUdion In intetstate commerce; reset. for
ultimate public consumption for domestic, commerdal. industrial, or any other use; transportatfon or sale
for local distribution, or as a c:fnct ..... interstate or Intrastate pipeline.

<<<PAGE 11>>>

22
API REX
OMMENDED PRACTICE 80
CanitralStat.on
Decicion. Tree d
NOTE:
stors such as "(a)(THA)
subpamgraphs in ga.
acks refer to correspond
sing we
Predation 3
is there a downstruam
ins Protesting Pie
•You
downstream Gas Process
CHOOSE met outer
No
• Contral
station
ing Treatment Far
14 1000°
MOOSE
INTACH
downstream commeging
CHOOSE Furing mos:
20:0:
1.
intral
Statio
sease pressure
cuct on
anatner pooine
_ Canapar
Transmis
lind
to une dine rasporting gea
Producãon Operations
exclusivety back io
andior Gathering Facilties
Yes
CHOOSE turthernost downstrear
art of gas delivery to a Produca
FURTHERMOST OOWNSTREAM CHOSEN
lor tuel, gas let, or
Operabion or Gathering Facilty
POINT IS THE END OF GATHERING
pas injection
HIS TRANSPORTATION E
IOT GATHERING
COMMENT Su Process Parts an da pes transp
De 300 stat
Lahon
processing
Figure B-2-Alternative 1 Decision Tree for Figure B-1 (Scenario A)
4

<<<PAGE 12>>>

2.2.1.2.1 incidental GaIMrIng
_ In die ClIP A{ gat proceasiIIa or •• "".",. die CODIIIIC-
tIOD to a lJ'WISIDiSJion liDc is poenI1y a""irwl widlin the
boundariea of die facility. 1bia is DOt always tbe cae. bow·
8'tU The $IIbIIriDI tiae operab may bawl 10 IIIOWI !be 1M
through a pipeline some aaditiOliiI distance from the p!aql19
anoi&f mpeli!ie: Ttle pipeline movie,§ the gas from m.; Il'&tIl
t~ another e!pelioc is termed "inc;idenW gatb!;ring." 'J:M
-Incidental ga1herin( resumes ;u the e outlet and 1.UIQn-
ues to the other pIpeline connection. lncidental satheriDI!!!!Y
----------- - -- "'
----.' - --
,
Furthetmo8t
Downatraam
Point
in Production
r----.... /7.:::fn{wft!;G;,
Production ~ ....... p 'l)ct!ssar.9 Plan!. Gas 7' fllil\fnafl t
Operation >= ~IY, Gas COmO rEl,;iiJon, ?(
:'lOll'!: t ol l ast Comm7rqiJr':i
(~fQ'''"'''' , r,..r~s..........;:~, ; M _ ,
\ ';'"" It .----'
\
--
----- --- ~:==(=:x---::::--::..-:::.-::.-=--=-...J- -)
.... --~:;,..e---'Jq; ~~I~ -------.
cox P":.av";'-'''''''
Figure 2-6-(nddental Gathering Downstream of an Identified Endpoint
5

<<<PAGE 13>>>

DEPAR11tBfT OF TRANSPORTA1lON
PiptfkJe and tta_ .. foua ........
w.ty AcfmifHttation
4t CFR hrt 1t2
{OodIlIt No. PtW8A-1t18 •• ; AmcIt. 192-
102)
FIN 2137-A81.
a.~UM~
AIterrIatiYe 0eflnifI0n for Onshore
Unea and New SafatyStandatds
AOINCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA). DOT
4CTtO\II: finat nd<J
._-------
SIJMMAllV: l'hlli dClion adopts a
COlUeOSUll standard to distinguiJlh
OIIJIho1'll gathering Hoas from other gas
pipeUnes and production operations. 10
addition. it establishes safety rules for
certain onshore gathering tines in rural
areas and revises cutre'ut rules for
certain onshore gathering lines in
nonrural areas. Operators will U$tI a new
risk-based. approach to determine which
onshore gathering lines are subject to
PHMSA's gas pipeline safety rules and
which of these rules the lines mUliI
meet. PHMSA intends this action to
reduce disagreements over
classifications of onshore gathering
lines, increase public confidence in the
safety of onshore gathering lines. and
provide safety rules comistent with the
risks of ombore pthering lines.
OATU: This final rule takes effect April
14. ZOO6. The Dltector of the Federal
Rtgister approves the incorporation by
ref'etence of API RP 80 in thill rule as of
April 14. 2006.
POll FlMTHIR 1NIORIIA11OH CONI'ACT:
DeWitt Butdeeux by phone at 405-954-
72%0 or bye-mail at
dewitt.burdeawcOcrot.gov.
SUH\.lllllrfAAY IMIOIIMATtON:
L8~
A. Current RejulatiOR of Onshore
Gathering Unes; Definition Problem
Gas gathering lines are pipelines used
to collect natural gas from production
facilities and transport it to transmission
or distribution lines. which then
tranaports it to the consumer. PHMSA's
pipelille safety ruJes in 49 CFR part 192
apply to tlut transportation o( natural
gas and other gas by pipeline, However.
onshore gathering lines in nual areas
(areas outside cities. towns. villages. or
designated tellidential or commercial
areas) are subject only to S 192.612.
which prescribes ilUpaction and burial
requirements for lines within Gulf of
Mexico inlett (f5192.1(b)(<I) and (b)(5)).
(Note: Lines in these inlets 81'11 nat
covered by this final rule.)
Under S 192.9. Ptherins lines in
nonrural areas must meet the tame
safety standards for deIip.
construc:tion. testing. operation. and
maintenance as p5 transmisaiDn lines,
except the requirements of § 192.150 on
passage of an intenIaJ inspection device
(also known as smart pigs) and subpart
o on integrity management. In addition,
PHMSA's drug and alcohol testing
regulatiOlU in 49 CFR part 199 apply to
nonrural gas ptbering lin •.
Section 192.3 currently defines the
terms "gathering line." "trammission
line," and "distribution line":
"Gathering liM" IlIMfU 8 pipeline thaI
transports sa. from a cummt production
facUity to a tranJlmiuion line or main.
''Trall$mUsloo liM" m-.s a pipeline. other
than a gathering Itne, tbat I_potU &as from
a pthering line or 5tDlIp I'acllity to a gas
distribution center or storage faciUly:
OpetatllS at a hoop stress of 20 percent or
more of a Spadlled Minimum Yield Strength
(SMYS). or IrarulpGrtS gas wilhin 8 storage
field. "Distribution line" _, a piptlliae
other than 8 gathering or transmasion line.
Beeatl4e these definitions are circular
and part 19Z does not dafine
"production CacUity," operators and
government inspectors have had
djfficulty distinguishing regulated
gathering lines from untegulated
production £acillties and unregulated
gathering lines from regulated
transmission and distribution lines.
Also. tbe complexity of many gathering
systems bu increased the difficulty of
distinguishing gathering lines.
B. Past Attempts To Resolve the
Definition Problem and Dtttermine the
,\Ieed To RBsuJate Rural Gathering UnftS
In 1974. DOT tried to correct the
problem of distinguishing gathering
lines by proposing to revise the
gathering line definition (39 FR 34569;
Sept. 26. 1914 •. However, the proposal
was later withdrawn becaUS8 comments
indicated many terms and phrases wen!
unclear (43 FR 42773: Sept. 21. 19781.
Afterward. the problem lingered until
1986. when the National Association of
Pipeline Safety Representatives
(NAPSRI. a nonprofit association of
State pipeline safety officials. svrveyed
its members and reported numerous and
continuing disagreements with
oparaton over ptberioa lines. Driven by
the NAPSR survey. in 1991 DOT apin
propoHd to revise the gathering line
definition (56 PR48SOS; Sept. 25. 1991).
However. the public response was
generally unfavorable. so DOT delayed
any furthet action until it collected and
considered mote information.
13289
Part 192 does not regulate the safety
of most rural ptbering lines because.
untill991. the pipeline safety law (49
U.S.c. Chapter 6(1) restricted OOT's
authority over onshore gathering lines to
linea in IlOIltW'&llocatiOlU. 1 In 1992.
Consresa save DOT specific authority to
define gas pthering lines foe purposes
of safety regulation. and to regulate a
class of twal pthering lines called
"regulated gathering lines" (49 U.S.C.
60101(a}(Zl) and 60101{b)). The new
authority directed DOT to consider
functional and operational
cbaracteri$tics in defining gathering
lines. Further direction was to consider
such factors as locetion. length of line,
operating pressure, throughput. and gas
composition in deciding which rural
lines warrant regulation. This authority
also expressly allows PHMSA to depart
from the concepts of gathering under Ihe
Natura] Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 et seq.!
[n 1999. in furtherance of the still
open 1991 pthering line proceeding
and Congress' action on gathering lines.
DOT opened B Web site for public
discussion of the definition problem
and the need to regulate rural gathering
lines (Docket No. PHMSA-l998-4868;
64 FR lZ147; Mar. t 1. 1999). The
comments mainly focused on the
comprehensive work by the American
Petroleum lrutltute (API). later
published i1$ API Recommended
Practice 80. "Guidelines for the
Definition of Onshore Gas Gathering
Lines" (API RP 801. API RP 80 defines
onshore gas gathering lines through II
series of definitions. descriptions. and
diagrams intended to represent the
varied and complex nature of
production and gathering in the U.S.
Althoush industry commentl!fl'S spoke
favorably about the API RP 80 gathering
line definition. NAPSR objected to the
I.LSe of certain "furthermost
downstream~ endpoints to mark the
beginning and and of gathering.
NAPSR's concem was if tmr definition
W81'll included in part 192. operators
would have an incentive to establish or
move the endpoints further downstream
to reduce the amount of regulated
pipelines. While comidering its next
'itep. DOT published an Advisory
Bulletin to ~mind operators it was still
resulating gathering lines according to
court precedents and its prior
interpretatiOllJ (57 FR 644<17; October
18.ZO(2).
Then in 2003. DOT held public
meetings in Austin. Texas (63 FR 625$5;
November 5. z003) and Ancllorap.
Alaaka (63 FR 87129; December 1. 2003)

<<<PAGE 14>>>

13292 Federal Resister/Vol. 71. No. so/Wednesday. March 15. 2006/Rules and Regulations
proposed definitions and safety rules
follows.
A. Proposed De/inition of "Onshont
Gatharing L.ine"
We wanted to define "onshore
gatharina line" in a way that not only
reuooably matched cummt
classifications but also addresaed
NAPSR's concerns. So we propoeed to
allow operators to use API RP 80 to
determine "OlUftore gathering lines."
But use of API RP 80 would be subject
to the following five limitations on th,.
beginning of gathering and the pO$SiLl,'
endpoints of gathering under section
2.2(a) oC API RP 80:
1. Under section Z.Z(a)(11. the
beginning of an onshore gathering line
is the furthermost dowMtl'l!!llm point in
a production operation. We proposed t •
. •
tftStrict this point to piping or
t!quipment used solely in the process () r
' '\.t r .. l ct in~ rhthi t .tl ;.tfl S frn Ol t!H ? (o.nth fc.!'
(he fust time and preparing it for
lransportntion or delivery. The purpos,'
of the limitation was to ensuro cenain
dual-use equipment. r.apabllt of USI! in
either production or transportation.
would be part of gathering wh~n nol
IlSed solely in tho process of extracting
and prej)8ring gas for transportation.
2. Unoer section Z.2(aIU)(A). the flTS l
possible endpoint is the inlet of the
rurthermost downstream natura! gas
processing plant. other than a nalural
gas processing plant located on a
Inlnmlwion line. We proposed this
endpoint may not be a natural gas
processing plant located further
downstream than the first downstream
natural au processing plant unless the
operator can demonstrate. baaed on
sound engineering reuoDl. gathering
should extend beyond the fU'St plant.
Past DOT interpretations and Stale
agency enforcement actiOIU have
recognizad the first downstream natural
gas processing plant as the customary
end of gathering. (See PHMSA', Web
site for intetpnttations and enforcement
actiOlU: http://www.phtma.dot.govl.)
3. Under section 2.2(a)(1)(8). the
second possibla endpoint is the outlet of
the furthennost downstream gathering
line gas treatment facility. We proposed
this endpoint would apply only if no
other endpoint under sections 2.2(a)(1)
(AI. (C). (OJ or (E) existed.
4. Under section 2.2{a){1)(CI. the third
possible endpoint is the furthermost
downstream point whate gas produced
in the same production field or separate
production fields are commingled. This
endpoint recognizes a gathering line
may receive gas from several production
fields. But because it does not restrict
the distance between fields. gatherinS
could potentially continue endlessly.
causing reclassifications from
lnIIUmWion to gathering along the way.
To set a reasonable limit. we proposed
lha1 ~ala pcoductioA fivlda from
which ps is comminaJed must be
within 50 mila of each other. We
specifically invited comments on
w hether it maxI ilium d.i$l;l.nco: i.s n <l"d",1
5. Under ,'W(~ !ion 2.2{a,){ t )(O), l hl!
fuurth 1 tho (lutl'!l IIi
filii ei)mpro~ sil r
..tllttOO Il.Sc ·,j It) lower gathecing line
" p'lromng pressure to facilitate
deliveries into the pipeline from
production operatioM or to increase
gatberiog line pressure for delivery to
another pipeline. For colUistency with
: lH r r 'd ;"; 'l tJl tjO rt1 r~ r nti('l n; .tnd ( Hr; ~ ' i 't r
l " nfo - !l- ( ~f n t ~ n ! i ' } IiLL V~ t.~ ~ ~ ' ! p nf pr;: ~;' f ' !f i
; inj: H thi:" H llr i.pHtn t to- th t. !: 'J ut h ,~ !-~,' .oj
Cq))\ ' ;'f ~ r., , $ o r u ,Sg rj ~-Q d·,t ' ~ ' ·i~
, t nt prn p:( " ~ ':l t ~l ~
- {HI {H i
~ h iJ fHr'f' po , ;;::tjb 1 1 ~ {;n d f_ n· :.~ n ! i HHh"f
·· ;} : ~J i U H '.!. .Z{;1 j{ 1 ifEj -rh b j f~JH : i
-
lh t ~
'on {~ H . ,U~\ ' '' 'f - d.:~ jlljn ·,:
D n f!! n! A, iH tlltJ4h-rrfl .
" t ,(\ ' h ' ~
d ,....:. ·!1,·, .. . jf ... :. ;, ~ h · t tl·'"~:di h~ !;. ;t . !:; ..
·j"'wrhUh Hn ; -r " d ~!, _ . I !( i f:
:!,ef<l 'l:: f j . rh, ~ ': Ii l :}f : .u ~~
'\ tl~ ;~ •. ~ ;;'
~ - ; t ! ~ ' t~' }_ f~hh f
, . \C ) "
.1 , tf1i'i Pf t12;~ tip ", ~'''' J. ~ i q}\'ii;i" l.~ : :; , .~
f n HH !hn n uti!.'{ ,I :! rl J:! (iLl: i ~ •. L '"
:. rr .ln ''i\l,;1s.''. :{.ltt , I ... :;
; :(itHF 'rf ,i t : ;H I: S:ll t..;;S : U O : i n· ~ fd Unt~ ;,t
t h ! ~ s~ ~ f ~ nd p "- J i nh tH' \ .. ;,1\ ilf ,. Hh~ (r H ~ r
t;lulih .1\'" illj { ul!l." d " n.ci " H Ud,jfH.!1
il "th . ~ r i nj,\ "
B. Proposed ~linition o/ "Reguloted
Onshore Gathering Line"
We proposed to amend S 192.3 to
define "regulated oruIhore gathering
lines" by either of two risk categories.
Type A and Type B. ba5lId on operating
stress and location. Type 1\ would
include lines whose maximum
allowable operating pressure (MAOPI
results in a hoop strtw of 20 percent or
more of SMYS. and nOll-metallic lines
whose MAOP is more than 1 Z5 per
square inch gauge (psis). The location
would be Clus 3 and 4 locations. as
defined in § 192.5. and other areas the
operator determines using potential
impact circles with five or more
dwellings or a sliding corridor 440 yards
by 1000 feet with eitber 5 or more
dwellings per 1000 feet or 25 or more
dwellings per mile. whichever results in
more regulated lines. Type A lines in a
Clau 1 or Clua Z location would also
include additionallengtha of line
u~m and downstream to serve as a
sbield apinst potential harm to neatby
dwellings.
Type B lines would include metallic
lina whoae MAOP produces a boop
stress of lUI than 20 percent of SMYS.
and non-metallic lines whose MAOP is
125 psiS or less. The location would be
Cla.u 3 and 4 locations and other areal
detennined by a sliding corridOt' 300
feet by 1000 feet with 5 or more
dwellings per 1000 feet. Lines within 8
Clasa 1 or Class 2 location would
include additional lengths of line u a
shield agaillJt potltntial harm to nearby
dwellings.
C. Proposed Safety Requirements
We proposed to revise § \92.9 to
incJude safety requirements for all
88thering lines subject to part 192.
Paragraph (b) would simply restate the
present part 192 requirements
applicable to offshore gathering lines.
Under paragraph (el. Type A
regulawd onshore gathering lines would
have to meet part 192 requirements
applicable to transmiuion !intIS, eX(:l!pt
requirements concerning the passage of
smart pigs (§ 192.150) and inte&rity
management (subpart 01. Because of the
higher stress at which Type A IinO$
operate and their ability to harm more
of the public. we considered Type A
lines to warrant safety requirements
equivalent to transmission line
requirements. Currently regulated
gathering lines are subject to these
requirements.
PIltagnpb (dl contains the proposed
requirements for Type B regulated
onsnore gathering lines. These lines.
although located near the public and
housing. operate at a lower stress than
Type A linea and pD!18 a lower-risk. So
for Type B lines. we proposed safety
requirements focused just on the main
threats to these linM-COrrosion and
excevation damage. First. new lines and
existins Itnes replaced. relocated. or
otherwise chanpd would have to be
designed. installed. constructed.
initially inspected. and Initially tested
according to part 192 requirements.
Second. operatOtt of Type B lines would
have to control CQITOSion according to
applicable subpart I requirements: carry
out a damage prevention program under
S 192.614: establish MAOP under
S 192.619; install and maintain line
markets under § 192.707 according to
transmission line requirements; and
establilh a public education program as
required by § 192.616.
To allow time for line identification
and preparation for compliance. we
1

<<<PAGE 15>>>

Federal Resfster/Vol. 71, No. sO/Wednesday. March 15. 2006/Rulea and Regulations 13295
thought the government should have the
burden of proving further downstream
procusing is not nuded. In addition.
West thousht we should allow
economic tebODlJ as plOOf.
b. PHMSA Responae
We have not experienced a situation
in which the closiDfJ of a au proawing
plant affected a Dthering line
classification. Although clo$ings of a
few weeks for maintenance reasons
would not trigger a classification
change, longer closings could occur for
Ii variety of reasons .nd the duration
could be uncertain. So we decided not
to make a general statement on how
temporazy plant closures would affect
the end of gathering. [nstead. when
requested. we will detennine the impact
of closings on an individual btiis 8$ the
need to do so arises. We expect certified
State agencies with safety Jurisdiction
over gathering lines under 49 U.s.C.
60105 will do IikewiM.
Regarding West's burden of proof
issue, it is not unusual for part 192
safety rules to include exceptions
applicable only if operators can
demonstrate certain conditions exist.
For example. under S 192.479(c}.
operators do not have to protect.
aboveground pipelines from
atmospheric corrosion if tbey
demofl$trate the corrosion will have
certain characteristics. We require
operators to demonstrate grounds for
exceptions when they are the best
sourcs of information on which tbe
exception is based. In the case of
gathering lines. we think operators are
the best source of information to
demonstrate wby t'urtber downstream
processing is necessary to complete the
gathering process.
As fortlie proof required in the
demonstration. no doubt economics
would be a factor in any decision
involviBi further downstream
proceasing. However, many of our prior
interpretations have based the end of
gathering on the first downmeam
processing plant. Maintaining
COfl$istency with this policy as f'ar as
possible is desirable for botb
~~tandindusuy.Forthis
reason. we think any future variation
should be baed on the fundamental
qualities of gas ptOCU$ing. which is best
determined by engineering analyses
rather than economic conditions. which
are transitory. Therefore. tlut proposed
limitation is unchanged in the final rule.
3. Umitation on Furthermost Treatment
Facility Endpoint
Under section 2.2(a)(1)(8) of API RP
80. gathering end. at the outlet of the
furthermost downstream gathering line
gas treatment facility. We proposed the
following limitation:
The.u.lpoblt 1JBd.t..:tion U(a)(l)(B} of
API RP 80 iIp'plles oaIy if no other enc:f;Ioint
ideDt!fi«I UDder section U{a}(l}(A}
I~. (a)(t)(C) Icomminalin8l. or
(a)(1)(D) (comprestioaJ exi.Its.
We intended this limitation to elude
manipulation of the transition
gatherins to tranamission by installing
equlpment used in gas treatment.
a.Comments
CoaJition. supported by Duke. said the
proposed limitation would make the
furthermost treatment endpoint
unusable. becau$e processing.
commingling. or compression is almost
always upstream or a treatment facility.
These commenters insisted gathering
should continue downstream to a gas
treatment facility 8Ildpoint no matter if
compression. commingling. or
processing occurs upstream. Coalition
offered an alternative approach to
preclude treatment manipulation:
(11 Use the following wording: "The end of
a gathering line' • • mall nol be defined
by !.he installatiol1 of one or _ pieces of
gas t~lin8 equipment at an extremo
downstream location that is not justified by
sound englnllllring and economic princlpi,"
indepenmml of the pipeline's rngulatory
classification," (21 e:xplain in the final rule
preamble that lhis endpoint refers to a "gas
treating plant" or similat facility and is not
intend8d' to b.t Ii simple piece of equipment
like a separator or dehydrator lother than as
can be shown. usilla sound engineerill8 and
economic principles. to be needed at that
location to meet transmiuioa pipeline
specifications •.
b. PHMSA Response
Section 2.2.1.2.2 of API RP 80
explains the meaning of a IJU treatment
fiK:ility under section 2.2(a){t){B). Tbis
provision describes gathering gas
treatment (other than treatment in gas
processing or compression) as involving
significant stand-alone fiK:ilities (e.g .• a
sulfur recovery or large dehydration
facility). We think this explanation is
sufficient to preclude possible
manipulation of tbe treatment endpoint
by installing a simple piece of
treatment-related equipment. such as I
separator or dehydrator. Tbta,
Coalition's alternative is not nac9SS8ty
aDd the proposed limitation is
withdrawn.
4. Umitation on Furtberm.ost
C'Ammingling Endpoint
Under section 2.Z(a}{1)(C} of API RP
80. gathering ends at the furthermost
downstream point where gas produced
in the samo production field or separate
production fields Is cornmil181ed. We
proposed the following limitation:
It the endpoizIt is determined by the
COmmins/11II 01., from aepantte production
fielda, tIM fielda may not be more than 50
miIas from each 0Ihet.
With no limit on the distance between
separate production fields, a gathering
line could continue endlessly, causing
reclassification of pipelines from
transmission to gathering.
I. Comments
Coalition. Duke. and west said the
proposed limitation was not flexible
enough to aCCOWlt for future
acquisitions and use of maturing fields.
Duke said its existing commingled fields
were less than SO miles apart. Althougb
Coalition thought some commingled
fields were 125 miles apart. it did not
cite an actual example. Coalition and
[luke ~Ilmm'md.-d allowin~ case-by·
case regulatmy approvals of longer
distanc81J bated on sound engineering
and economic reasons.
h. PHMSA Response
Because. Duke. the largest gas
gathering line operator in the U.S .. said
the proposed 5O-mile limit would be
adequate for its current systems. the
proposed SO-mile limit is unchanged in
the final rule. We did not adopt
Coalition's request to change the limit to
125 miles because it did not provide any
examples of an existing system where
the 50-mile limit would he too
restrictive. However. to provide
flexibility. the final rule allows
operators to petition PHMSA, under the
procedures in 49 CFR § 190.9. to find a
longer limit Is justified in Ii particular
case.
'}. UuutathHl Ijil F!Hitl'~rm"'il
nl!Ufll"'~lf Rw.l!P'.;int
Under.section 2.2(a){l)(O} of APt RP
BO, gatherina ends at the outlet of the
furthetmost downstraam compressor
'italion used to lower gathering line
"perating pressure to facilitate
deliveries into the pipeline from
production operations or to increase
K,ltbering line pnlSSur& for delivery to
mother pipeline. We proposed the
following limitation:
The endpoint llay not extend beyond the
ttlttlwmost dotrIIstram compr..- used to
incre.e ~ line presatJ.l1! for delivery
t .. another pipeliDe..
This limitation is consistent with our
past interpretations.
a.Comment
CoaJition agreed with the proposed
limitation. but asked us to clarify
deUvery to "Itnothm- pipo!linfl" d_ nol
nutltn <idl~lIrv!u ,mother jt",t!Wf1Il~ I ill"

<<<PAGE 16>>>

13Z98 Fedet-ai &egister'/Vol. 71. No. SO/Wednesday. March 15. 2006/Rules and Regulations
b PHMSA Rc~ "POO !W
SeCliun 3,:: .!\ of ;\ PI RP ao S<i'is, '! h'.!
d.,finiHon of ¥ thfl ri nq iine did 0\.)1
dlrnc!i .. ad dress IhH iss t'" ·.If ( )IJ( ,
" pemtor's gathering lin(' tmgi n ni ng or
."oding with a conne( ItOn !o alloth.,!
op eralor's galhering HOI1, " Balieij on flii"
cbtifl(ation. "' .. b!!)iev0 ilw t f.!ml
" in :'>Id,oll
:!.zta 0 R? 00 W~S nolllll3an
dl)I ...
·I)dng to at),;nhffl' ItH lhr:r ~ns nne
8. [)eluting . Rtlgulated Onshom
Gothsring Line"
We proposed to citanp how part 192
applies to onshore gathering lines
outside lnlets of the Gutr of Mexico by
ITIllIdng the rules fit the level of risk
gathering lines pre5ent. The proposal
would restrict rules to two categories of
lines, Type A and Type B, and define
these lines as "regulated onshore
gathering lines:' A description of the
proposed definition is in section U of
this preamble.
1. Approach To Defining Regulated
Lines
a. Comments
Columbia sU880sted we adopt a
simpler definition of "regulated onshore
~thering line" limited to lines in Class
:I and Class 4 locations and lines in
Class \ and Class 2 locations where a
potential impact circle includes 20 or
more dwellings. It said the alternative
would be easier to understand and
apply, and consistent with the
scientific-based definition of "high
consequence area" in § 192.903. PST
also sugested II more straightforward
approai:h under which gatherina ~d
trarurmission linea of similar pressures
and operating conditioM would be
regulated alike. and other gathering
linea would be regulated the same as
distribution lin8$.
b. PHMSA £Wporue
We did not adopt Columbia's
alternative because it would apply 1M
same ciaaification method (potential
impact circles with 20 or more
dwellings) to high-pressure and Iow-
pressure lines in Class 1 and 2 locations.
If impact circles were applied to low-
pressure lines in Class 1 end 2 locations.
the circles would most likely be too
small to include 20 Ol" more dwellings.
So the risk of low·preuure lin .. to
fewer than 20 nearby dwellings would
not be addressed.
PST's alternative parallels our
proposal to resulate higher-risk
gathering lines the same as transmission
lines. but most transmission Iina rules
are more stringent than appear to be
necessary for lower-risk gathering lines.
Also, satheringlioes are not sufficiently
similar to distribution lines to apply the
same rules to both types of lines.
2. Identifying Regulated Unes by
Potentiallmpact Cltcles
.. Comments
AGA and Dominion supported using
potential impact circles to identify
higher-risk resufated gathering. but said
the population criteria (proposed 5 or
more dwellings} should not be more
stringent than the criteria applied to gas
transmission lines (20 or more
dwellings under S 192.903). Dominion
also suggested allowing use of impllt.'t
circles as an optional identification
method for Type B lines. not just Type
A lines as proposed.
NAPSR spotted an irregularity in
using potential impact circles to identify
Type A iines. Some smaller Type B
lines (10 inches nominal diameter or
less) uprated to operate above 20
perc~nt of SMYS would lose their
regulated status if operators use impact
circles to identify Type A lines and the
circles do not contain the minimum
number of dwellings (5) found in the
rectangles (300 It x 1000 ft) previously
used to identify the lines as Type B.
Likewise. the use of im~ct circles
could cause some currently regulated
nonrurallines operating above 20% of
SMYS to lose their regulated status.
!Wen though Similarly situated Type B
lines would remain regulated.
Consequently, NAPSR suggested we
adopt the proposed Type B rectangles
and safety rules as the minimum
standard of :safety for all regulated lines.
b. PHMSA Response
The decision diBcuued below (in
response to NAPSR's comment) to
withdraw the proposal on using
potantial impact circles to identify Type
A lines makes the ACA and Dominion
comments moot. Nevertheless, we offer
the following: Section 192.903 requires
20 or more dwellings in potential
impact circles used to identify
transmission line segments subject to
integrity management rules. These rules
apply to the identified segments in
addition to other applicable
traJumi&sion rules. In contrast, we did
not propose to apply integrity
management rules to Type A lines
identified by circles with just 5
dwellings or more. So we do not
consider the proposed S-per.citele
method to be more stringent than the
2o-per-circle method used for integrity
management.
We did not propose potential impact
circles to identify Type 8 lines because
for low-pressure lines the circles would
most lik&ly be too ,mall to contain 8t
least 5 dwellings. For this reason. they
would not equate to the proposed
method aU or more dwellings per 1000
Feet. As further explained under
subbeedina 4 of this section of the
preamble. we did not edopt potential
impact circles as a method to identify
Type 8 lines.
We believe NAPSR recognized 8
serious equivalency problem in
allOwing use of the proposed impact
circles to Identify Type A lines. The
outcome could easily be an unregulated
gathering line operating above 20
percent of SMYS next to a regulated
Typo B line. with both lines exposing
tho same dwellings to risk. To avoid th is
situation. we are withdrawing the
proposal to use potential impact circles
to identify Type A IinM. We did not
ildopt NAPSR's suggested remedy
because the compliance cost of
detecting 5 dwellings per 1000 feet
would likely be disproportionate to the
rnmefits. as discussed below uodllr
:iubheading 4 ofthis ~tion of the
preamble.
J, Identifying Regulated Lines by
Operating Stress
0\. Comment
COillition said 20 percent of SMYS is
too low to di$tinguish high.stress Type
A lines from low·stress Type B lines. It
recommended using 30 percent of
SMYS as in SS t92.935. 192.931, and
192.941 for integrity management and in
§§ 192.505 and \92.501 for pr8l$ure
testing because lines operating 8t less
tban 30 percent of SMYS may leak but
not rupture.
b. PHMSA RespoMe
To regulate the safety of rural gas
gathering lines. PHMSA mu.st consider
various physical characteristics.
including operating presaure. to decide
which lines warrant safety regulation
(49 U.s.C. 60101(a)(21}(B) and
(b}(2)(AI). We proposed 20 percent of
SMYS M indicative of onshore gathering
lines whose operating pntsSute presents
a significant enough risk in certain
circumstances to wammt the same
amount of reauiation as transmission
lines, except rules on integrity
management and smart pig passage. The
basis for this 2O-percent threshold is the
part 192 definition of "transmission
line." wh ich incJude& pipelines other
than gathering lines operatina at 20
percent of SMYS or more. These
pipelines must meet all applicable part
192 safety rules. Because Type A lines
can pose risks Jimi lar to transmission
lines. we do not think 30 percent of
q

<<<PAGE 17>>>

, .
GAS C9MPRISHQN
5. SedIDa 191.I(a)(4) .... the RP ... defiaJdoa of PI ......... fBdadcs .. ODe or the
poIeIIdai ...,0 .... of .......... "tile Mdet of .. t'1utIIenIaoIt dowllltmUD
COIDJIft •• r .... Ie"'" pdIertq Uae .......... prell" co r.cutate delhreries
lato die pIpeIIae fnHn proclIICdoa operatIou or te lacnae ......... be press.re
for ddlvuy to aaotIIer pIpeUM." What Is "HOttler plpeUaeot?
PHMSA Rupon$~:
~ ~ -f..to ..... ~~",..-\
~ 6; d~ Ilo"I l~~.l
(V'X
I} OC\1..>O-':!;, -
~ \q~.8'O)
o..N An-
~i>-?O'.~
'1.' .'1-
fl,i~ V4.L "~N..So.l
~ \S,~O-~~ p.\!.a-t:a.
ID

## Provenance

- Official: Yes
- Source: <https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/2009/PI-09-0002.pdf>
- Source ID: `phmsa`
- SHA-256: `5717fa01f4730338cd1a9669a672f5f397e25a63d8ff0f9ff68e04fcea8d90ca`
- Retrieved: 2026-08-20T00:59:31.977Z
- Exported: 2026-08-23T18:37:22.564Z
- Document slug: `phmsa-interpretation-pi-09-0002`

### Source metadata

```json
{
  "materialSubtype": "interpretation",
  "interpretationArea": "pipeline_safety",
  "representation": "full_text_from_official_pdf",
  "companies": [
    "CDX Gas"
  ],
  "individuals": [
    "Mr. Greg Schrab"
  ],
  "refIds": [
    "PI-09-0002"
  ],
  "catalogDates": [
    "2009-07-14"
  ],
  "catalogParts": [
    192
  ],
  "catalogRowCount": 1,
  "sourceRecordUrls": [
    "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/node/68536"
  ],
  "linkedAttachmentUrls": [],
  "unavailableResponseUrls": [],
  "duplicateRepresentationUrls": [],
  "citedSections": [
    "192.8",
    "192.3",
    "192.7",
    "190.9",
    "190.11",
    "192.9",
    "192.612",
    "192.150",
    "192.5",
    "192.614",
    "192.619",
    "192.707",
    "192.616",
    "192.479",
    "192.903",
    "192.931",
    "192.941",
    "192.505"
  ],
  "catalogPageUrls": [
    "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/1928"
  ],
  "pdfUrls": [
    "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/2009/PI-09-0002.pdf"
  ],
  "representations": [
    {
      "viewUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/2009/PI-09-0002.pdf",
      "detailUrl": null,
      "detailHtmlPath": null,
      "pdfUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/2009/PI-09-0002.pdf",
      "pdfArtifactPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/pi-09-0002.pdf",
      "pdfArtifactSha256": "964ebdc37d9284d712a3e2d5af8af84cde5329b01ceddc2cf938c5df3aec349d",
      "extractedTextPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/pi-09-0002.v2.txt",
      "extractedTextSha256": "5edd919622005171efe5839223c98361646110970fe7f61f1cb1f67d370e7b90",
      "pageCount": 17,
      "extractionVersion": 2
    }
  ],
  "caveat": "Interpretations apply regulations to the facts presented and do not create independently enforceable requirements.",
  "jurisdiction": "US"
}
```