{"operation":"document","citation":"PHMSA Guidance, Gas Integrity Management Enforcement Guidance","title":"Gas Integrity Management Enforcement Guidance","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2015-12-07","effective_on":"2015-12-07","summary":"Gas Integrity Management Enforcement Guidance Document Gas_Integrity_Management_Enforcement_Guidance_12_7_2015.pdf (1.76 MB) The materials contained in this document consist of guidance, techniques, procedures and other information for internal use by the PHMSA pipeline safety enforcement staff. This guidance document describes the practices used by PHMSA pipeline safety investigators and other enforcement personnel ","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-gas-integrity-management-enforcement-guidance-2e8eadbe.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-gas-integrity-management-enforcement-guidance-2e8eadbe.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-gas-integrity-management-enforcement-guidance-2e8eadbe","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/enforcement/gas-integrity-management-enforcement-guidance","body":"Gas Integrity Management Enforcement Guidance\n\nDocument\n\n Gas_Integrity_Management_Enforcement_Guidance_12_7_2015.pdf (1.76 MB)\n\n        The materials contained in this document consist of guidance, techniques, procedures and other information for internal use by the PHMSA pipeline safety enforcement staff. This guidance document describes the practices used by PHMSA pipeline safety investigators and other enforcement personnel in undertaking their compliance, inspection, and enforcement activities.\n\n          Issued Date: Monday, December 7, 2015\n\n<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nGas Transmission Integrity Management Enforcement Guidance\nSections 192.901 through 192.951\nIntroduction\nThe materials contained in this document consist of guidance, techniques, procedures and other information\nfor internal use by the PHMSA pipeline safety enforcement staff. This guidance document describes the\npractices used by PHMSA pipeline safety investigators and other enforcement personnel in undertaking\ntheir compliance, inspection, and enforcement activities. This document is U.S. Government property and is\nto be used in conjunction with official duties.\nThe Federal pipeline safety regulations (49 CFR Parts 190-199) discussed in this guidance document\ncontains legally binding requirements. This document is not a regulation and creates no new legal\nobligations. The regulation is controlling. The materials in this document are explanatory in nature and\nreflect PHMSA’s current application of the regulations in effect at the time of the issuance of the guidance.\nIn preparing an enforcement action alleging a probable violation, an allegation must always be based on the\nfailure to take a required action (or taking a prohibited action) that is set forth directly in the language of the\nregulation. An allegation should never be drafted in a manner that says the operator “violated the guidance.”\nNothing in this guidance document is intended to diminish or otherwise affect the authority of PHMSA to\ncarry out its statutory, regulatory or other official functions or to commit PHMSA to taking any action that\nis subject to its discretion. Nothing in this document is intended to and does not create any legal or\nequitable right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by any person or organization\nagainst PHMSA, its personnel, State agencies or officers carrying out programs authorized under Federal\nlaw.\nDecisions about specific investigations and enforcement cases are made according to the specific facts and\ncircumstances at hand. Investigations and compliance determinations often require careful legal and\ntechnical analysis of complicated issues. Although this guidance document serves as a reference for the\nstaff responsible for investigations and enforcement, no set of procedures or policies can replace the need\nfor active and ongoing consultation with supervisors, colleagues, and the Office of Chief Counsel in\nenforcement matters.\nComments and suggestions for future changes and additions to this guidance document are invited and\nshould be forwarded to your supervisor.\nThe materials in this guidance document may be modified or revoked without prior notice by PHMSA\nmanagement.\ni\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nTable of Contents\nGlossary .................................................................................................................................iv\n§192.901.................................................................................................................................1\n§192.903.................................................................................................................................4\n§192.905.................................................................................................................................9\n§192.907(a) ............................................................................................................................15\n§192.907(b) ............................................................................................................................19\n§192.909.................................................................................................................................21\n§192.911.................................................................................................................................24\n§192.913.................................................................................................................................29\n§192.915.................................................................................................................................33\n§192.917(a) ............................................................................................................................36\n§192.917(b) ............................................................................................................................42\n§192.917(c) ............................................................................................................................48\n§192.917(d) ............................................................................................................................54\n§192.917(e) ............................................................................................................................57\n§192.919.................................................................................................................................63\n§192.921(a) ............................................................................................................................68\n§192.921(b) ............................................................................................................................73\n§192.921(c) ............................................................................................................................76\n§192.921(d) ............................................................................................................................80\n§192.921(e) ............................................................................................................................83\n§192.921(f) .............................................................................................................................86\n§192.921(g) ............................................................................................................................89\n§192.921(h) ............................................................................................................................92\n§192.923.................................................................................................................................95\n§192.925(a) & (b) ...................................................................................................................97\n§192.925(b)(1) .......................................................................................................................100\n§192.925(b)(2) .......................................................................................................................106\n§192.925(b)(3) .......................................................................................................................111\n§192.925(b)(4) .......................................................................................................................116\n§192.927(a) & (b) ...................................................................................................................120\n§192.927(c)(1) ........................................................................................................................124\nii\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n§192.927(c)(2) ....................................................................................................................... 128\n§192.927(c)(3) ...................................................................................................................... 131\n§192.927(c)(4) ....................................................................................................................... 135\n§192.927(c)(5) ....................................................................................................................... 139\n§192.929.................................................................................................................................142\n§192.931.................................................................................................................................146\n§192.933(a) ........................................................................................................................... 149\n§192.933(b) & (c) .................................................................................................................. 153\n§192.933(d) ........................................................................................................................... 157\n§192.935(a) ........................................................................................................................... 162\n§192.935(b) ........................................................................................................................... 166\n§192.935(c) ........................................................................................................................... 171\n§192.935(d) ........................................................................................................................... 173\n§192.935(e) ........................................................................................................................... 177\n§192.937(a) & (b) .................................................................................................................. 180\n§192.937(c) ........................................................................................................................... 186\n§192.939(a) ........................................................................................................................... 190\n§192.939(b) ........................................................................................................................... 195\n§192.941(a) ........................................................................................................................... 200\n§192.941(b) ........................................................................................................................... 202\n§192.941(c) ........................................................................................................................... 205\n§192.943.................................................................................................................................208\n§192.945.................................................................................................................................211\n§192.947.................................................................................................................................216\n§192.949.................................................................................................................................219\n§192.951.................................................................................................................................222\n3\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nGlossary\nFor a complete “Glossary of Terms” please refer to the following\nlink: http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/staticfiles/PHMSA/Pipeline/TQGlossary/Glossary\n.html\n4\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nEnforcement\nGuidance\nRevision Date Code Section Section Title Existing Code\nLanguage\nOrigin of Code Last Amendment Interpretation\nSummaries\nAdvisory\nBulletin/Alert\nNotice\nSummaries\nOther Reference\nMaterial &\nSource\nPart 192, Gas Transmission Pipeline Integrity Management\n12/7/2015\n§192.901\nWhat do the regulations in this subpart cover?\nThis subpart prescribes minimum requirements for an integrity management\nprogram on any gas transmission pipeline covered under this part. For gas\ntransmission pipelines constructed of plastic, only the requirements in §§192.917,\n192.921, 192.935 and 192.937 apply.\nAmdt. 192-95, 68 FR 69778, December 15, 2003\nAmdt. 192-95A, 69 FR 9307, December 20, 2003\nAdvisory Bulletin ADB -12-03\nNotice to Operators of Driscopipe 8000 High Density Polyethylene Pipe of the\nPotential for Material Degradation\nOn March 6, 2012, PHMSA issued this advisory bulletin to alert operators using\nDriscopipe® 8000 High Density Polyethylene Pipe (Drisco8000) of the potential for\nmaterial degradation. Degradation has been identified on pipe between one-half inch\nto two inches in diameter that was installed between 1978 and 1999 in desert-like\nenvironments in the southwestern United States. However, since root causes of the\ndegradation have not been determined, PHMSA cannot say with certainty that this\nissue is isolated to these regions, operating environments, pipe sizes, or pipe\ninstallation dates. While the manufacturer has attempted to communicate with\nknown or suspected users, PHMSA and the National Association of Pipeline Safety\nRepresentatives (NAPSR) have identified several operators currently using\nDrisco 8000 pipe who had not received communications about the issue. PHMSA is\nissuing this advisory bulletin to all operators of Drisco 8000 pipe in an effort to\nensure they are aware of the issue, communicating with the manufacturer and their\nrespective regulatory authorities to determine if their systems are susceptible to\nsimilar degradation, and taking measures to address it.\nASME B31.8S-2004, Supplement to B31.8 on Managing System Integrity of Gas\nPipelines\nGas Piping Technology Committee (GPTC)\nPart 192, Appendix E.I\n§192.901 Page 1\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>\n\nGuidance\nInformation\nExamples of a\nProbable\nViolation or\nInadequate\nProcedures\nPHMSA Gas Transmission Integrity Management FAQs:\n2 Who must comply with the rule?\n3 Does the rule apply to operators of transmission pipelines for gases other\nthan natural gas?\n7 Do the requirements of the rule apply to \"idle\" pipe?\n9 Does the rule apply to gathering and other low-stress lines?\n84 The Integrity Management Program portion of the rule [192.907] applies to\nall portions of a pipeline system that are in HCAs, including compressor\nstations, metering stations, and other equipment. What must an operator do\nto comply with the rule for these facilities?\n150 What requirements must an operator meet if there are no high consequence\nareas on any of its transmission pipelines?\n188 Are jurisdictional gathering lines covered?\n247 For plastic transmission pipeline, must I meet all of the requirements in the\nsections specified in section 192.901 or just those requirements specifically\ndirected at plastic pipe?\n1. The requirements of Subpart O apply to all gas transmission pipelines\nincluding compressor stations, metering stations, regulator stations, valve sets,\nand other fabricated assemblies.\n2. All requirements of Subpart O apply to “line pipe.”\n3. For pipeline facilities other than “line pipe,” an assessment may not\nnecessarily be required.\n4. Plastic transmission pipelines must be included in an integrity management\nprogram. The Preamble of the Federal Register notes that most of the\nrequirements are applicable to metal pipelines, not plastic, only certain\nrequirements apply to plastic gas transmission pipelines. Requirements for a\ncontinuing threat analysis (§§192.917, 192.937), a baseline assessment if a\nthreat other than third-party damage is identified (§192.921), and additional\npreventive and mitigative measures (§192.935) apply to plastic gas\ntransmission pipelines. (Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 240 / Monday,\nDecember 15, 2003 / Rules and Regulations at Page 69801.)Failure to have\nprocedures to address this Integrity Management element should be cited\nunder the appropriate paragraph of §192.911\n1. Failure to apply Subpart O requirements to all of the pipelines or components\ncovered under the Subpart. Since 192.901 solely involves subpart scope,\nthere are no requirements that can be violated, however cross referencing of\nthis regulation is acceptable when citing other regulation for failure to apply\nrequirements to pipelines or components.\n2. Failure to include plastic gas transmission pipe in their Integrity Management\nProgram.\nDepending on the circumstances, some of the examples listed in this section may be\ninadequate plans and procedures, and not probable violations. Thus, the enforcement\ntool to address these issues would be a Notice of Amendment and not a Notice of\nProbable Violation or a Warning Letter. Section 3 of the Enforcement Procedures\nprovides guidance on selecting the appropriate enforcement action.\n§192.901 Page 2\n\n<<<PAGE 7>>>\n\nExamples of\nEvidence\n1. Integrity Management Plan or Program, or applicable portion that shows an\nomission or deficiency in the Plan or Program.\n2. Records.\n3. Documented conversations with operator or contractor personnel identifying\ninconsistencies or problems regarding implementation of the IM program.\nOther Special\nNotations\n§192.901 Page 3\n\n<<<PAGE 8>>>\n\nEnforcement\nPart 192 Gas Transmission Pipeline Integrity Management\nGuidance\nRevision Date 12/7/2015\nCode Section §192.903\nSection Title What definitions apply to this subpart?\nExisting Code\nLanguage\nThe following definitions apply to this subpart:\nAssessment is the use of testing techniques as allowed in this subpart to ascertain\nthe condition of a covered pipeline segment.\nConfirmatory direct assessment is an integrity assessment method using more\nfocused application of the principles and techniques of direct assessment to\nidentify internal and external corrosion in a covered transmission pipeline\nsegment.\nCovered segment or covered pipeline segment means a segment of gas\ntransmission pipeline located in a high consequence area. The terms gas and\ntransmission line are defined in §192.3.\nDirect assessment is an integrity assessment method that utilizes a process to\nevaluate certain threats (i.e., external corrosion, internal corrosion and stress\ncorrosion cracking) to a covered pipeline segment's integrity. The process\nincludes the gathering and integration of risk factor data, indirect examination or\nanalysis to identify areas of suspected corrosion, direct examination of the\npipeline in these areas, and post assessment evaluation.\nHigh consequence area means an area established by one of the methods\ndescribed in paragraphs (1) or (2) as follows:\n(1) An area defined as-\n(i) A Class 3 location under §192.5; or\n(ii) A Class 4 location under §192.5; or\n(iii) Any area in a Class 1 or Class 2 location where the potential impact\nradius is greater than 660 feet (200 meters), and the area within a\npotential impact circle contains 20 or more buildings intended for\nhuman occupancy; or\n(iv) Any area in a Class 1 or Class 2 location where the potential impact\ncircle contains an identified site.\n(2) The area within a potential impact circle containing-\n(i) 20 or more buildings intended for human occupancy, unless the\nexception in paragraph (4) applies; or\n(ii) An identified site.\n(3) Where a potential impact circle is calculated under either method (1) or\n(2) to establish a high consequence area, the length of the high\nconsequence area extends axially along the length of the pipeline from\nthe outermost edge of the first potential impact circle that contains either\nan identified site or 20 or more buildings intended for human occupancy\nto the outermost edge of the last contiguous potential impact circle that\n§192.903 Page 4\n\n<<<PAGE 9>>>\n\ncontains either an identified site or 20 or more buildings intended for\nhuman occupancy. (See Figure E.I.A. in Appendix E.)\n(4) If in identifying a high consequence area under paragraph (1)(iii) of this\ndefinition or paragraph (2)(i) of this definition, the radius of the potential\nimpact circle is greater than 660 feet (200 meters), the operator may\nidentify a high consequence area based on a prorated number of buildings\nintended for human occupancy with a distance of 660 feet (200 meters)\nfrom the centerline of the pipeline until December 17, 2006. If an\noperator chooses this approach, the operator must prorate the number of\nbuildings intended for human occupancy based on the ratio of an area\nwith a radius of 660 feet (200 meters) to the area of the potential impact\ncircle (i.e., the prorated number of buildings intended for human\noccupancy is equal to 20 x (660 feet) [or 200 meters]/potential impact\nradius in feet [or meters]**2).\nIdentified site means each of the following areas:\n(a) An outside area or open structure that is occupied by twenty (20) or more\npersons on at least 50 days in any twelve (12)-month period. (The days need\nnot be consecutive.) Examples include but are not limited to, beaches,\nplaygrounds, recreational facilities, camping grounds, outdoor theaters,\nstadiums, recreational areas near a body of water, or areas outside a rural\nbuilding such as a religious facility; or\n(b) A building that is occupied by twenty (20) or more persons on at least\nfive (5) days a week for ten (10) weeks in any twelve (12)- month period.\n(The days and weeks need not be consecutive.) Examples include, but are not\nlimited to, religious facilities, office buildings, community centers, general\nstores, 4-H facilities, or roller skating rinks; or\n(c) A facility occupied by persons who are confined, are of impaired\nmobility, or would be difficult to evacuate. Examples include but are not\nlimited to hospitals, prisons, schools, day-care facilities, retirement facilities\nor assisted-living facilities.\nPotential impact circle is a circle of radius equal to the potential impact radius\n(PIR).\nPotential impact radius (PIR) means the radius of a circle within which the\npotential failure of a pipeline could have significant impact on people or\nproperty. PIR is determined by the formula r = 0.69* (square root of (p*d \\2\\)),\nwhere `r' is the radius of a circular area in feet surrounding the point of failure,\n`p' is the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) in the pipeline\nsegment in pounds per square inch and `d' is the nominal diameter of the pipeline\nin inches.\nNote: 0.69 is the factor for natural gas. This number will vary for other gases\ndepending upon their heat of combustion. An operator transporting gas other\nthan natural gas must use section 3.2 of ASME/ANSI B31.8S-2001 (Supplement\nto ASME B31.8; incorporated by reference, see §192.7) to calculate the impact\nradius formula.\n§192.903 Page 5\n\n<<<PAGE 10>>>\n\nOrigin of Code Last Amendment Interpretation\nSummaries\nAdvisory\nBulletin/Alert\nNotice\nSummaries\nRemediation is a repair or mitigation activity an operator takes on a covered\nsegment to limit or reduce the probability of an undesired event occurring or the\nexpected consequences from the event.\nAmdt. 192-95, 68 FR 69778, December 15, 2003\nAmdt. 192-103A, 72 FR 4655, February 1, 2007\nInterpretation: WINDOT 192.903 1 Date: 08-15-2008\n\"Should the property boundary of a golf course be considered as a 'recreational\nfacility' and therefore an identified site? It is our intention to only count golf course\nboundaries as identified sites where they are occupied by 20 or more persons within\nthe PIR [potential impact radius] at one time for at least 50 days in any 12 month\nperiod. Is this an acceptable interpretation of the rule with regard to golf courses?\"\nThe gas integrity management program (IMP) rules are intended to protect identified\nsites occupied by 20 or more persons for specified periods. While it is possible for\n20 or more persons to congregate near the boundary of a golf course inside a\npipeline's PIR, these persons would likely be in transit and cannot truly be said to\n\"occupy\" the area as intended by the regulations. Therefore, such a location would\nnot be an identified site per §192.903.\nPHMSA does not recommend using a golf course boundary to define an identified\nsite because the boundary, in and of itself, is of little value. Instead, we recommend\nlooking for sites such as a clubhouse, practice greens, or combinations of sites, such\nas a putting green near a tee box, to find areas on a golf course that are occupied by\n20 or more persons for the specified periods. These could be identified sites.\nAdvisory Bulletin ADB-03-03\nIdentified sites for possible inclusion as high consequence areas (HCAs) in gas\nintegrity management programs.\nOn August 6, 2002, RSPA/OPS published a final rule on how to identify the\npopulated areas near a pipeline for which additional protections would be required\n(67 FR 50824). These “high consequence areas” (HCAs) include not only\npopulation areas already identified by pipeline operators through the longstanding\nClass location definitions, but also “identified sites,” 49 CFR 192.761(f). Inclusion\nof identified sites is intended to pick up isolated population areas which are not\npicked up through the Class location process. These could include isolated nursing\nhomes, schools, and campgrounds that may be close enough to the pipeline to be at\nrisk should there be a pipeline failure. Commenters expressed concerns that what\nwas intended to be a relatively simple task, identifying certain sites as high\nconsequence areas, could become a never-ending search. RSPA/OPS is providing\nguidance in this advisory bulletin to provide the necessary clarification. With this\nguidance, operators can identify sites in preparation for required assessments and\nintegrity management programs. The public will receive the assurance that the\nsearch for “identified sites” for inclusion in integrity management programs is\nclearly understood and thorough. The advisory bulletin provides guidance on a good\nfaith effort in conducting this search.\n§192.903 Page 6\n\n<<<PAGE 11>>>\n\nOther Reference\nMaterial &\nSource\nASME B31.8S-2004, Supplement to B31.8 on Managing System Integrity of Gas\nPipelines, Section 3\nGas Piping Technology Committee (GPTC)\nPart 192, Appendix E.I\nTTO-13, Potential Impact Radius Formulae for Flammable Gases Other\nThan Natural Gas Subject to 49 CFR 192, June 2005\nTTO-14, Derivation of Potential Impact Radius Formulae for Vapor\nCloud Dispersion Subject to 49 CFR 192, January 2005\nPHMSA Gas Transmission Integrity Management FAQs:\n17 What is an identified site?\n119 Can I use normal operating pressure in my potential impact circle\ncalculations if that pressure is significantly below MAOP?\n144 What is the preferred method for calculating the Potential Impact Radius\n(PIR) of a leak of a non-flammable gas within the context of Pipeline\nIntegrity Management? The regulation refers to ASME B31.8S-2004\nSection 3.2 for calculation of PIR for gases other than natural gas. However,\nthis document only deals with flammable gases. ASME B31.8S-2004 allows\nalternate models to be used for calculating impact radius, but provides no\nguidance as to preferred methods of modeling non-flammable or corrosive\ngases.\n208 Is the derivation of the PIR equation publicly available?\n211 What is the time period for the 20 persons in an area? 20 people for 10\nmin/day, 20 people for 2 hours/day, 20 people for 8 hours/day?\nGuidance\nInformation\n1. Definitions included in IM plans must be consistent with those found in\n§192.903.\n2. The formula for calculation of the potential impact radius must be consistent\nwith 192.903 requirements [r = 0.69* (square root of (p*d \\2\\))] and the\npressure used in the formula must be based on maximum allowable operating\npressure (MAOP).\n3. Equation for PIR can only be used for flammable gas. The factor (0.69) may\nvary according to the flammability of the actual gas compositions (see TTO-\n13 or ASME B31.8S-2004, Section 3.2).\n4. Failure to have procedures to address this Integrity Management element\nshould be cited under the appropriate paragraph of §192.911.\n5. Selected Final orders referencing §192.903\na) Indiana Gas Co. Inc., [2-2007-1014], (July 15, 2010), Item 2B, Operator\nfailed to ensure that accurate maximum allowable operating pressures were\nused to determine the potential impact radius.\n§192.903 Page 7\n\n<<<PAGE 12>>>\n\nExamples of a\nProbable\nViolation or\nInadequate\nProcedures\n1. Definitions are not consistent with Part 192.\n2. Records do not demonstrate the proper factor (i.e. - .69 for pipeline quality\nnatural gas) for calculating potential impact radius was used.\n3. MAOP was not used to calculate the PIR.\nDepending on the circumstances, some of the examples listed in this section may be\ninadequate plans and procedures, and not probable violations. Thus, the enforcement\ntool to address these issues would be a Notice of Amendment and not a Notice of\nProbable Violation or a Warning Letter. Section 3 of the Enforcement Procedures\nprovides guidance on selecting the appropriate enforcement action.\nExamples of\nEvidence\n1. Integrity Management Plan or Program, or applicable portion that shows an\nomission or deficiency in the Plan or Program.\n2. Records.\n3. Formula for calculating PIR.\n4. Records of product being transported.\n5. Documented conversations with operator or contractor personnel.\n6. Documented conversations with operator or contractor personnel identifying\ninconsistencies or problems regarding IM definitions.\nOther Special\nNotations\n§192.903 Page 8\n\n<<<PAGE 13>>>\n\nEnforcement\nPart 192 Gas Transmission Pipeline Integrity Management\nGuidance\nRevision Date 12/7/2015\nCode Section §192.905\nSection Title How does an operator identify a high consequence area?\nExisting Code\nLanguage\n(a) General. To determine which segments of an operator's transmission pipeline\nsystem are covered by this subpart, an operator must identify the high\nconsequence areas. An operator must use method (1) or (2) from the\ndefinition in §192.903 to identify a high consequence area. An operator may\napply one method to its entire pipeline system, or an operator may apply one\nmethod to individual portions of the pipeline system. An operator must\ndescribe in its integrity management program which method it is applying to\neach portion of the operator's pipeline system. The description must include\nthe potential impact radius when utilized to establish a high consequence area.\n(See appendix E.I. for guidance on identifying high consequence areas.)\n(b)(1) Identified sites. An operator must identify an identified site, for purposes\nof this subpart, from information the operator has obtained from routine\noperation and maintenance activities and from public officials with safety\nor emergency response or planning responsibilities who indicate to the\noperator that they know of locations that meet the identified site criteria.\nThese public officials could include officials on a local emergency\nplanning commission or relevant Native American tribal officials.\n(2) If a public official with safety or emergency response or planning\nresponsibilities informs an operator that it does not have the information\nto identify an identified site, the operator must use one of the following\nsources, as appropriate, to identify these sites.\n(i) Visible marking (e.g., a sign); or\n(ii) The site is licensed or registered by a Federal, State, or local\ngovernment agency; or\n(iii) The site is on a list (including a list on an internet web site) or map\nmaintained by or available from a Federal, State, or local government\nagency and available to the general public.\n(c) Newly identified areas. When an operator has information that the area\naround a pipeline segment not previously identified as a high consequence area\ncould satisfy any of the definitions in §192.903, the operator must complete the\nevaluation using method (1) or (2). If the segment is determined to meet the\ndefinition as a high consequence area, it must be incorporated into the operator's\nbaseline assessment plan as a high consequence area within one year from the\ndate the area is identified.\nOrigin of Code Amdt. 192-95, 68 FR 69778, December 15, 2003\nLast Amendment\n§192.905 Page 9\n\n<<<PAGE 14>>>\n\nInterpretation\nSummaries\nAdvisory\nBulletin/Alert\nNotice\nSummaries\nOther Reference\nMaterial &\nSource\nAdvisory Bulletin ADB-03-03\nIdentified sites for possible inclusion as high consequence areas (HCAs) in gas\nintegrity management programs.\nOn August 6, 2002, RSPA/OPS published a final rule on how to identify the\npopulated areas near a pipeline for which additional protections would be required\n(67 FR 50824). These “high consequence areas” (HCAs) include not only\npopulation areas already identified by pipeline operators through the longstanding\nClass location definitions, but also “identified sites,” 49 CFR 192.761(f). Inclusion\nof identified sites is intended to pick up isolated population areas which are not\npicked up through the Class location process. These could include isolated nursing\nhomes, schools, and campgrounds that may be close enough to the pipeline to be at\nrisk should there be a pipeline failure. Commenters expressed concerns that what\nwas intended to be a relatively simple task, identifying certain sites as high\nconsequence areas, could become a never-ending search. RSPA/OPS is providing\nguidance in this advisory bulletin to provide the necessary clarification. With this\nguidance, operators can identify sites in preparation for required assessments and\nintegrity management programs. The public will receive the assurance that the\nsearch for “identified sites” for inclusion in integrity management programs is\nclearly understood and thorough. The advisory bulletin provides guidance on a good\nfaith effort in conducting this search.\nASME B31.8S-2004, Supplement to B31.8 on Managing System Integrity of Gas\nPipelines, Section 3\nPart 192, Appendix E.I\nSupplemental Guidance Appendix A.01, Protocol Guidance for the Identification of\nHigh Consequence Areas.\nPHMSA Gas Transmission Integrity Management FAQs:\n17 What is an identified site?\n18 Are there practical limits on an operator’s search for identified sites?\n19 What are OPS expectations for operators to determine new or changed\nHCAs?\n20 When must newly-identified HCAs be included in the program?\n117 How often must an operator update its building density survey and list of\nidentified sites to determine if new HCAs have been created?\n120 Who is an appropriate safety authority for locating identified sites?\n143 When determining \"identified sites\", does one have to consider standing\ntraffic on roads/expressways under the \"outside area or open structure\"\nportion of the definition? If so, is there any guidance on how many people\nper vehicle should be used to compute the total of 20?\n170 Must an operator continue to contact public safety officials in order to locate\nidentified sites even if they don’t respond?\n§192.905 Page 10\n\n<<<PAGE 15>>>\n\n176 Is a single home housing a disabled person considered an identified site?\n191 If a pipeline is determined to fall within an HCA due to its class location,\ndoes the operator also have to identify identified sites?\n195 How were the Fire Marshals notified of providing assistance in locating\nidentified sites? Is there written communication (i.e., documentation) that\noperators can reference?\n233 Does growth of an existing HCA, which introduces new length of pipeline\nsegment into the HCA, constitute a \"newly-identified HCA?\"\nGuidance\nInformation\n1. The §192.903 definitions provided are to determine identified sites that may\nbe considered an HCA for a specific pipeline operator as the regulations for\n192.905 are applied.\n2. Each operator should have maps of their pipelines systems along with\nidentified HCA’s along the pipeline route. The operator must use system\nmaps or other suitably detailed means to identify pipeline segment locations\nthat are located in high consequence areas.\n3. The operator's process must describe how to implement methods (1) and/or\n(2) in order to identify high consequence areas (HCAs). The operator's must\ndocument the method used for each portion of the pipeline system.\n4. The operator must periodically look for changes along its pipeline to identify\nnew HCAs. Additionally, those with no IM Program must continually take\nmeasures to look for new HCAs along their pipelines.\n5. Operators were allowed to pro rate house counts in determining whether an\nHCA area existed. The time frame for this expired in December 2006 and\nprorating is no longer allowed.\n6. Failure to have a process/procedure to identify HCAs or having an inadequate\nprocess describing how to apply Method 1 or 2 should be cited under\n§192.911(a).\n7. Selected Final Orders Referencing §192.905:\na) Mardi Gras Pipeline, LLC, [4-2009-1007], (December 19, 2011),\nItem 1, Operator failed to properly identify those segments of its gas\ntransmission pipeline system that constituted HCAs.\nb) Mardi Gras Pipeline, LLC, [4-2009-1007], (December 19, 2011),\nItem 2, Operator failed to use public officials as a resource in the\nidentification of areas that would qualify as “identified sites” within the\npotential impact radius along the pipeline.\nc) Northwest Pipeline Corp., [5-2007-1001], (May 2, 2011), Item 1,\nOperator failed to describe and document in its IMP which method it had\napplied to each portion of its pipeline system to identify HCAs. The\noperator also failed to maintain records to support any decision, analysis\nor process developed and used to implement its IMP. Specifically, it\nalleged that the operator failed to keep documents supporting the\nprocess(es) that had been used to identify each HCA segment.\n§192.905 Page 11\n\n<<<PAGE 16>>>\n\nd) Northwest Pipeline Corp., [5-2007-1001], (May 2, 2011), Item 2A,\nOperator failed to describe in its IMP which method it had applied to each\nportion of its pipeline to identify HCA segments. Specifically, the system\nmaps and the Geographic Information System (GIS) used by the operator\nfailed to establish a suitable means of documenting segment locations in\nHCAs.\ne) Northwest Pipeline Corp., [5-2007-1001], (May 2, 2011), Item 2B,\nOperator failed to use certain information available to it in cases where\npublic officials with safety or emergency response or planning\nresponsibilities had informed the company that they did not have\ninformation delineating identified sites. Specifically, the operator had\nfailed, by December 17, 2004,to use visible markings, licensing or\nregistration by a governmental agency, or listing on the Internet or other\npublic available maps maintained by governmental entities to delineate\nidentified sites in lieu of obtaining relevant information from public\nofficials. Also, the operator did not have procedures on how it located\nidentified sites using such alternative sources of information.\nf) Northwest Pipeline Corp., [5-2007-1001], (May 2, 2011), Item 4,\nOperator failed to properly identify HCA areas using one of the methods\ndescribed in paragraph (1) or (2) of §192.903. There were four separate\nviolations:\nItem 4A, Operator failed to properly apply Method 1 in delineating\nHCAs, insofar as the full length of Class 3 and 4 locations was not\nincluded in the HCAs.\nItem 4B, Operator failed to properly identify HCA areas using Method 1\nunder §192.903. Specifically, the operator failed to properly identify\nHCAs under portion of Method 1 which calls for the identification of\nareas “in a Class 1 or 2 location where the potential impact circle contains\nan identified site”. Documentation reviewed during the inspection showed\nidentified sites on the operator’s Transco system that the company had\nfailed to include in HCAs. The HCA identification process was flawed\ninsofar as the company’s field personnel were not even trained in the HCA\nidentification process until well after December 17, 2004.\nItem 4C, Operator failed to properly identify HCA areas using Method 1.\nSpecifically, the operator defined the term “day” as a continuous 8 hour\nperiod, for purposes of determining whether structures or outdoor areas\nqualified as identified sites. This definition was inconsistent with the\nregulation, insofar as the 20 or more persons criterion applied to the\npresence of people at a particular location at any point in time.\nItem 4D, Operator failed to properly","truncated":true,"body_characters":514652}