{"operation":"document","citation":"PHMSA Guidance, Alaska Gasline Development Corp. - PI-15-0010","title":"Alaska Gasline Development Corp. - PI-15-0010","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2017-03-22","effective_on":"2017-03-22","summary":"Alaska Gasline Development Corp. - PI-15-0010 Document Alaska_LNG_PI_15_0010_03_22_2017_Part_192_327.pdf (3.48 MB) Interpretation of Part 192 as it applies to the cover requirement for a pipeline in Cook Inlet, Alaska. Issued Date: Wednesday, March 22, 2017","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-alaska-gasline-development-corp-pi-15-0010-84d0aa1e.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-alaska-gasline-development-corp-pi-15-0010-84d0aa1e.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-alaska-gasline-development-corp-pi-15-0010-84d0aa1e","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulatory-compliance/phmsa-guidance/alaska-gasline-development-corp-pi-15-0010","body":"Alaska Gasline Development Corp. - PI-15-0010\n\nDocument\n\n Alaska_LNG_PI_15_0010_03_22_2017_Part_192_327.pdf (3.48 MB)\n\n        Interpretation of Part 192 as it applies to the cover requirement for a pipeline in Cook Inlet, Alaska.\n\n          Issued Date: Wednesday, March 22, 2017\n\n<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nM AR Z Z 2017\nMr. Keith Meyer\nPresident\nAlaska Gasline Development Corporation\n3201 C Street, Suite 200.\nAnchorage AK 99503\nDear Mr. Meyer:\nIn a letter to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) dated\nOctober 16, 2015, Exxon Mobil Alaska LNG (Exxon Mobil) requested a two-part interpretation\nof 49 CFR 192.327(f)(2) to determine whether Exxon Mobil could use the cover requirement in\n§ 192.327(f)(2) for a pipeline in Alaska's Cook Inlet. PHMSA. understands that Alaska Gasline ·\nDevelopment Corporation (Alaska Gasline) has purchased the project that was the subject of the\nOctober 16, 2015, letter. This letter is being addressed to you as the new owner/developer.\nExxon Mobil stated in their letter that the Alaska LNG project is being developed to condition\nAlaska North Slope natural gas and transport it to a tidewater port near Nikiski on the Cook Inlet\nfor liquefaction and loading to liquefied natural gas (LNG) marine vessels. The proposed project\nfacilities include a liquefaction facility on the eastern shore of Cook Inlet in the Nikiski area of\nthe Kenai Peninsula, which will be supplied by an approximately 1,287 km (800-mile ), large-\ndiameter natural gas pipeline from the North Slope. ·\nPHMSA understands that Alaska Gasline is now leading the design and engineering of the\nproject facilities, including a large-diameter gas transmission pipeline that will cross the Cook\nInlet in Alaska. Exxon Mobil Alaska LNG sought confirmation that:\n1. 2. The Cook Inlet is considered \"Offshore\" for purposes of49 CFR Part 192; and\nSection 192.327(f)(2) details the cover requirements for the pipeline segment that crosses\nthe Cook Inlet.\nIn response to the first question, Exxon Mobil correctly notes that PHMSA has previously issued\nan interpretation that the Cook Inlet waters are considered \"Offshore.\" In a September 16, 1997,\nletter of interpretation (#PI-97-010) to Mr. R.J. Redweik, Staff Environmental Engineer, Shell\nWestern E&P Inc., PHMSA stated:\nThe pipeline facilities are subject to Part 195 requiremeilts because, for purposes of the\npipeline safety regulations, we do not consider the facil!ties to be located onshore.\nAlthough the pipeline safety regulations do not define onshore, offshore is defined in\n§ 195 .3 as being \"beyond the line of ordinary low water along that portion of the coast of\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations ( 49' CFR\nParts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect the agency's current application of the regulations to the specific facts\npresented by the person requesting the clarification. Interpretations do not create legally-enfo1 ceable rights or obligations and are provided to\nhelp the public understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n2\nthe United States that is in direct contact with the open seas and beyond the line marking\nthe seaward limit of inland waters.\" The facilities are located in the waters of Cook Inlet,\nwhich average a depth of 100 feet, 35 foot tides, and 7 knot currents. Cook Inlet is in\ndirect contact with the open seas, as evidenced by tides and currents. Recent pipeline\nsafety legislation and regulations have focused on the potential hazards to navigation\nposed by submerged pipeline facilities. Thus, our intent in delineating onshore from\noffshore waters is to focus on waters where submerged pipeline facilities pose a risk to\nthe public and the environment. The pipeline facilities in Cook Inlet pose a safety hazard\nto navigational traffic.\nPHMSA had come to the same conclusion in an earlier May 19, 1997 letter of interpretation to\nMr. Redweik (#PI-97-010), noting that the Coast Guard-which shares similar concerns about\nhazards to navigation - treats the Cook Inlet as \"offshore\" rather than \"inland waters.\"\nFor the reasons stated above, PHMSA continues to classify the Cook Inlet as \"Offshore.\"\nPHMSA acknowledges that the May 19, 1997, and September 16, 1997, interpretations address\nPart 195, not Part 192. However, neither Part defines the term \"Onshore\" and both include\nidentical definitions of the term \"Offshore,\" and the 1997 interpretation therefore is fully\napplicable to Part 192.1 For the reasons stated above, under the definition used in both Part 192\nand Part 195, the Cook Inlet is \"Offshore\" - the inlet lies beyond the line of ordinary low water\nalong the portion of the coast of the United States that is in direct contact with the open seas, and\nis beyond the line marking the seaward limit of inland waters.\nAdditionally, the conditions in the Cook Inlet are similar to open-sea operating conditions.\nRecent measurements from three localities on the Cook Inlet: Nikiski, Alaska; Seldovia, Alaska;\nand Tesoro Pier, Cook Inlet, Alaska, show that during September 2016, the Cook Inlet averaged\ntides of 20 feet, winds of 5 knots, wind gusts that can reach above 20 knots, and currents in\nexcess of 5 knots.2 Therefore, pursuant to previous PHMSA letters of interpretations and the\ncurrent conditions in the Cook Inlet, the Cook Inlet waters are appropriately classified as\n\"Offshore.\"\n1 Compare 49 CFR 192.3 with 49 CFR 195.2 (\"Offshore means beyond the line of ordinaiy low water along that\nportion of the coast of the United States that is in direct contact with the open seas and beyond the line marking the\nseaward limit of inland waters.\").\n2 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Tides and Currents Map, State of Alaska - Nikiski Station,\n· Alaska, and Seldovia Station, Alaska. Available at http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/map/ (Site last visited\nSeptember 22, 2016); See also 2016 Current Tables, Western Alaska: Icy Bay to The Bearing Sea - Tesoro Pier,\nCook Inlet, Alaska. Pages 112-115. Approved by the United States Coast Guard.\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations\n( 49 CFR Parts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect the agency's current application of the regulations to the\nspecific facts presented by the person requesting the clarification. Interpretations do not create legally-enforceable rights or obligations and\nare provided to help the public understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n3\nAs to the second question whether cover requirements in§ 192.327(f)(2) apply to the pipeline\nsegment for the Alaska LNG project. Section 192.327 states, in relevant part:\n§ 192.327 Cover.\n(a) ...\n(f) All pipe installed offshore, except in the Gulf of Mexico and its inlets, under\nwater not more than 200 feet ( 60 meters) deep, as measured from the mean low\ntide, must be installed as follows:\n(1) ...\n(2) Pipe under water at least 12 feet (3.66 meters) deep must be installed so\nthat the top of the pipe is below the natural bottom, unless the pipe is supported by\nstanchions, held in place by anchors or heavy concrete coating, or protected by an\nequivalent means.\nPer the interpretation #PI-97-010, the Cook Inlet waters average 100 feet in depth, which is less\nthan 200 feet; therefore, PHMSA's cover requirement in§ 192.327(f)(2) applies. Further, a\npipeline crossing Cook Inlet - whether installed below the natural bottom or supported by\nstanchions, held in place by anchors or heavy concrete coating, as described by§ 192.327(f)(2)-\nwould also be required to meet all crossing and depth of cover requirements of any other agency\nwith permitting authority for navigable offshore waters, such as the U.S. Coast Guard and\nU.S. Army Corp of Engineers.\nI hope this interpretation has been helpful. If we can be of further assistance, please contact\nTewabe Asebe at 202-366-5523.\nSincerely,\nCameron H. Satterthwaite\nActing Director\nOffice of Standards and Rulemaking\ncc: Mr. Rick Noecker\nPHMSA Filing Coordinator\nAlaska LNG Project\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations\n(49 CFR Parts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect the agency's current application ofthe regulations to the\nspecific facts presented by the person requesting the clarification. Interpretations do not create legally-enforceable rights or obligations and\nare provided to help the public understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nAlaska L G\nAlaska LNG Project\nPipeline Engineering\n237 4th Ave SW\nCalgary, AB T2P OH6\nCANADA\n16 October 2015\nMr. John A. Gale, Director\nOffice of Standards and Rulemaking (PHP-30)\nPHMSA, U.S. Department of Tran~portation,\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE ·\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nUSA\nRe: Request for Interpretation of the cover requirements for the Cook Inlet pipeline\ncrossing and the applicability of 49 CFR §192.327(f)(2)\nDear Mr. Gale:\nThe Alaska LNG (AKLNG) Project is being developed to condition Alaska North Slope (ANS)\nnatural gas and transport it to a tidewater port near Nikiski on the Cook Inlet for liquefaction and\nloading to liquefied natural gas (LNG) marine vessels. The project participants include the\nAlaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) and affiliates of Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips,\nBP and TransCanada Pipelines. The proposed Project facilities include a Liquefaction Facility\non the eastern shore of Cook Inlet in the Nikiski area of the Kenai Peninsula, which will be\nsupplied by an approximately 1 ,287 -km (800-mi), large-diameter natural gas pipeline from the\nNorth Slope. ·\nExxon Mobil Alaska LNG LLC (EMALL) is leading the design and engineering of the Project\nfacilities, including a large diameter gas transmission pipeline that will cross the Cook Inlet in\nAlaska. EMALL is seeking confirmation that 1) the Cook Inlet is considered \"Offshore\" for the\npurposes of CFR 192 and 2) that 49 CFR Part 192.327.(f)(2) details the cover requirements for\nthe pipeline segment that crosses the Cook Inlet.\nBackground\nIn response to Request for Interpretation Pl-97-100, PHMSA identified the Cook Inlet waters as\n\"Offshore\" with the following statements:\n\"The lines in Cook Inlet are offshore ... \"Offshore\" means beyond the line of ordinary low\nwater along the portion of the coast of the United States that is in direct contact with the\nopen seas .and beyond the line f!larking the seaward limit of inland waters.\"\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\n\"Cook Inlet waters are considered offshore as they are in direct contact with the open\nsea and not categorized as ''inland waters'~ Inland waters are specifically established by\nthe US Coast Guard under 33 CFR 80.01.\" '\nU.S. Coast Guard Title 33 CFR 80.01 goes on to state:\nThe regulations in this part establish the lines of demarcation delineating those waters\nupon which mariners shall comply with the International Regulations for Preventing\nCollisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS) and those water upon which mariners shall\ncomply with the Inland Navigation Rules.\nThe waters.inside of the lines are Inland Rules waters. The waters outside the lines are\nCOLREGS waters.\nU.S. Coast Guard Title 33 CFR 80.1705 declares that:\nThe 72 COLREGS shall apply on all the sounds, bays, harbors, and inlets of Alaska.\nFor offshore pipelines, the requirements for cover are covered in 49 CFR 192.327(f)(2), which\nstates:\n(f) All pipe installed offshore, except in the Gulf of Mexico and its inlets, under water not\nmore than 200 feet (60 meters) deep, as measured from the mean low tide, must be\ninstalled as follows:\n(2) Pipe under water at least 12 feet (3. 66 meters) deep must be installed so that\nthe top of the pipe is below the natural bottom, unless the pipe is supported by\nstanchions, held in place by anchors or heavy concrete coating, or protected by\nan equivalent means.\nRequest for Interpretation\nBased on the foregoing, the Cook Inlet is considered Offshore in the context of PHMSA's\nregulations per CFR 192. The Project pipeline as it crosses Cook Inlet, therefore, is an offshore\npipeline that is subject to the cover requirements of 49 CFR Part 192.327(f)(2). According to that\nprovision, the Cook Inlet crossing pipeline does not need to be buried so long as it is \"supported\nby stanchions, held in place by anchors or heavy concrete coating, or protected by an\nequivalent means. EMALL respectfully requests PHMSA's confirmation of this interpretation.\n· Thank you for your consideration of this request for interpretation. If you have any questions,\nplease contact me at 587-476-4891 or rick.noecker@exxonmobil.com.\nSincerely,\nRick Noecker\nPHMSA Filing Coordinator\nAKLNG Project, Pipeline Engineering\nFor and On Behalf of EMALL","truncated":false,"body_characters":13047}