{"operation":"document","citation":"PHMSA Guidance, Pipeline Safety: Planning for Coordination of Emergency Response to Pipeline Emergencies","title":"Pipeline Safety: Planning for Coordination of Emergency Response to Pipeline Emergencies","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2005-05-23","effective_on":"2005-05-23","summary":"Pipeline Safety: Planning for Coordination of Emergency Response to Pipeline Emergencies Document 05-10202.pdf (142.27 KB) This document alerts pipeline operators about the need to preplan for emergency response with utilities whose proximity to the pipeline may impact the response. Coordination with electric and other utilities may be critical in responding to a pipeline emergency. Preplanning would facilitate actio","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-pipeline-safety-planning-coordination-emergency-response-9557e55d.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-pipeline-safety-planning-coordination-emergency-response-9557e55d.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-pipeline-safety-planning-coordination-emergency-response-9557e55d","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulatory-compliance/phmsa-guidance/pipeline-safety-planning-coordination-emergency-response","body":"Pipeline Safety: Planning for Coordination of Emergency Response to Pipeline Emergencies\n\nDocument\n\n 05-10202.pdf (142.27 KB)\n\n        This document alerts pipeline operators about the need to preplan for emergency response with utilities whose proximity to the pipeline may impact the response. Coordination with electric and other utilities may be critical in responding to a pipeline emergency. Preplanning would facilitate actions that may be needed for safety, such as removing sources of ignition or reducing the amount of combustible material.\n\n          Issued Date: Monday, May 23, 2005\n\n<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nFederal Register / Vol. 70, No. 98 / Monday, May 23, 2005 / Notices\n29557\n• How do we improve effectiveness of\nthe one-call system and what is the role\nof technology?\n• How can we apply the Virginia\nexperience in other areas (i.e.,\ndistribution integrity management)?\n2. High Consequence Area (CCA) Pilots\n• Is there a way of using partnerships\nto expand damage prevention,\nemergency preparedness and response?\n• Are there key partners missing? If\nso, how do we enlist them, such as in\nthe areas of emergency preparedness,\nencroachment, etc.?\n• Should this best practice model be\nintroduced to all States?\n3. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)\n• Is PHMSA/OPS doing all it should\nto educate communities about LNG?\nShow Video Clip—Liquefied Natural\nGas\nPipeline Information Planning Alliance\n(PIPPA)\n• How do we approach home builders\nand insurers?\nImproving Our Stewardship in\nEnvironmental and Energy Projects\nThe OPS is the Federal pipeline safety\nexpert and recognizes how important it\nis to share its expertise with other\ngovernment and State agencies\nresponsible for supporting our\ngovernment’s national energy policies.\nOPS also provides information and\nassists other government and State\nagencies responsible for protecting our\nNation’s pipeline system.\n1. Permit Streamlining\n• How do we introduce our concepts\nto State and local agencies?\n• What is the most efficient way to\ndevelop best practices?\n• How could we effectively use and\nimprove on developing best practices\nduring implementation of the second\npilot program?\n2. Alaska\n• Are OPS’s current pipeline safety\nregulations aligned and applicable for\nthe new technologies and materials\nbeing proposed for the Alaska North\nSlope gas transmission pipeline?\n• What changes need to be made to\nensure the optimum delivery rate from\nAlaska, through Canada, and into the\nlower 48 States?\n3. Security\n• How can OPS ensure continuing\npipeline security in the current\nenvironment?\n• What is OPS doing for pipeline\nsecurity?\nAuthority: 49 U.S.C. 60102, 60115.\nIssued in Washington, DC on May 18,\n2005.\nTheodore L. Willke,\nDeputy Associate Administrator, Office of\nPipeline Safety.\n[FR Doc. 05–10275 Filed 5–19–05; 10:32 am]\nBILLING CODE 4910–60–P\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\nPipeline Safety: Planning for\nCoordination of Emergency Response\nto Pipeline Emergencies\nAGENCY: Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration, DOT.\nACTION: Notice; issuance of advisory\nbulletin.\nSUMMARY: This document alerts pipeline\noperators about the need to preplan for\nemergency response with utilities\nwhose proximity to the pipeline may\nimpact the response. Coordination with\nelectric and other utilities may be\ncritical in responding to a pipeline\nemergency. Preplanning would facilitate\nactions that may be needed for safety,\nsuch as removing sources of ignition or\nreducing the amount of combustible\nmaterial.\nFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:\nRobert J. Hall by phone at (202) 366-\n8860, by fax at (202) 366-4566, or by e-\nmail, robert.hall@dot.gov. General\ninformation about the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration’s Office of Pipeline\nSafety programs may be obtained by\naccessing the home page at http://\nops.dot.gov.\nSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:\nI. Background\nExisting regulations for both gas and\nhazardous liquid pipelines require\noperators to have emergency procedures\nto address pipeline emergencies. The\nkey element of these requirements,\nwhich are located at 49 CFR 192.615\nand 195.402(e), is to plan response\nbefore the emergency occurs. Because\npipelines are often located in public\nspace rather than in controlled access\nareas, planning emergency response\nmust include more than internal plans.\nThe regulations explicitly require that\noperators include procedures for\nplanning with fire, police and other\npublic officials to ensure a coordinated\nresponse. It is also important to plan a\ncoordinated response with owners of\nother utilities in the vicinity of the\npipeline. The operations of these\nutilities may provide sources of ignition\nfor the product released from a pipeline,\nmay increase the burning time of fires\nthat have already started, or may delay\nresponders who are attempting to make\nthe situation safe rapidly.\nIn the evening of April 7, 2003, a\nbreakout tank exploded and\nsubsequently ignited in Glenpool,\nOklahoma. The fire continued to burn\nand increased in the early morning of\nApril 8 when electric lines affected by\nthe previous day’s explosion and fire\nfell into a dike. The diesel fuel being\ncontained in the dike ignited, expanding\nthe fire. This resulted in a temporary\nsuspension of firefighting and damaged\nadditional facilities. While there were\nno injuries or fatalities, the fire burned\nfor over 20 hours; the cost of the\naccident exceeded two million dollars;\nresidents were evacuated; and schools\nwere closed. The National\nTransportation Safety Board (NTSB)\nconducted an investigation of the\naccident. In its report, the NTSB found\nthat lack of a coordinated emergency\nresponse contributed to the severity of\nthe accident. The NTSB noted that the\nexisting pipeline safety regulations on\nemergency procedures do not explicitly\nrequire that operators have procedures\nfor preplanning with electric and other\nutilities.\nA previous accident also points to the\nneed for better coordination of\nemergency response. On March 1, 1998,\na pipeline failure occurred when a raven\nlanded on a power line. This resulted in\na fault current that impacted a gas\npipeline in Anchorage, Alaska. The\nsituation very quickly developed into an\nexplosion at the public electric\ncompany’s plant. Although preplanning\nwas required by regulation, the pipeline\noperator did not coordinate emergency\nresponse well with the fire department\nresulting in delays in shutting off the\nflow of gas. This resulted in additional\nfire damage. Inadequate coordination\nwith the electric company also\ncontributed to this delay.\nThese accidents point to the need for\noperators to plan with utilities on how\nto coordinate actions needed in\nresponding to a pipeline emergency.\nThis preplanning will result in better\ncoordination when an emergency\noccurs.\nII. Advisory Bulletin ADB–05–03\nTo: Owners and Operators of Natural\nGas and Hazardous Liquid Pipeline\nFacilities in the Vicinity of Electric and\nother Utilities.\nSubject: Preplanning with owners of\nelectric and other utilities for\nVerDate jul<14>2003 16:20 May 20, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\\FR\\FM\\23MYN1.SGM 23MYN1\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n29558 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 98 / Monday, May 23, 2005 / Notices\ncoordinated response to pipeline\nemergencies.\nPurpose: To advise operators of\npipeline facilities located near electric\nand other utilities of the need to preplan\nemergency response with the owners of\nthose electric and other utilities to\nensure better coordination of response,\nand reduced damages, when a pipeline\nemergency occurs.\nAdvisory: Operators of pipeline\nfacilities are required to plan emergency\nresponse before an emergency happens.\nThe regulations include required\nelements of emergency plans and\nprocedures. In planning emergency\nresponse, an operator should carefully\nlook at the environment surrounding the\npipeline facility and the risks that the\nenvironment will pose in the event of a\npipeline emergency. Electric and other\nutilities may pose sources of ignition or\nmay provide additional fuel for fires.\nThe operations of these utilities may\nmake response to a pipeline emergency\nby firefighters or the pipeline operator\nmore difficult. Preplanning with these\nutilities will help the operator identify\nissues that may arise in responding to\npipeline emergencies and plan effective\nresponse before there is an emergency.\nThis will improve the coordination of\nemergency response and reduce delays.\nOPS advises pipeline operators to\ninclude within their emergency\nresponse planning outreach to owners of\nelectric and other utilities in order to\npreplan and coordinate response to\npipeline emergencies.\nIssued in Washington, DC, on May 17,\n2005.\nTheodore L. Willke,\nDeputy Associate Administrator for Pipeline\nSafety.\n[FR Doc. 05–10202 Filed 5–20–05; 8:45 am]\nBILLING CODE 4910–60–P\nVerDate jul<14>2003 16:20 May 20, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\\FR\\FM\\23MYN1.SGM 23MYN1","truncated":false,"body_characters":8957}