# Pipeline Safety: Planning for Coordination of Emergency Response to Pipeline Emergencies

- **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

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 actions that may be needed for safety, such as removing sources of ignition or reducing the amount of combustible material.

          Issued Date: Monday, May 23, 2005

<<<PAGE 1>>>

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 98 / Monday, May 23, 2005 / Notices
29557
• How do we improve effectiveness of
the one-call system and what is the role
of technology?
• How can we apply the Virginia
experience in other areas (i.e.,
distribution integrity management)?
2. High Consequence Area (CCA) Pilots
• Is there a way of using partnerships
to expand damage prevention,
emergency preparedness and response?
• Are there key partners missing? If
so, how do we enlist them, such as in
the areas of emergency preparedness,
encroachment, etc.?
• Should this best practice model be
introduced to all States?
3. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
• Is PHMSA/OPS doing all it should
to educate communities about LNG?
Show Video Clip—Liquefied Natural
Gas
Pipeline Information Planning Alliance
(PIPPA)
• How do we approach home builders
and insurers?
Improving Our Stewardship in
Environmental and Energy Projects
The OPS is the Federal pipeline safety
expert and recognizes how important it
is to share its expertise with other
government and State agencies
responsible for supporting our
government’s national energy policies.
OPS also provides information and
assists other government and State
agencies responsible for protecting our
Nation’s pipeline system.
1. Permit Streamlining
• How do we introduce our concepts
to State and local agencies?
• What is the most efficient way to
develop best practices?
• How could we effectively use and
improve on developing best practices
during implementation of the second
pilot program?
2. Alaska
• Are OPS’s current pipeline safety
regulations aligned and applicable for
the new technologies and materials
being proposed for the Alaska North
Slope gas transmission pipeline?
• What changes need to be made to
ensure the optimum delivery rate from
Alaska, through Canada, and into the
lower 48 States?
3. Security
• How can OPS ensure continuing
pipeline security in the current
environment?
• What is OPS doing for pipeline
security?
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60102, 60115.
Issued in Washington, DC on May 18,
2005.
Theodore L. Willke,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of
Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–10275 Filed 5–19–05; 10:32 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
Pipeline Safety: Planning for
Coordination of Emergency Response
to Pipeline Emergencies
AGENCY: Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of advisory
bulletin.
SUMMARY: 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert J. Hall by phone at (202) 366-
8860, by fax at (202) 366-4566, or by e-
mail, robert.hall@dot.gov. General
information about the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration’s Office of Pipeline
Safety programs may be obtained by
accessing the home page at http://
ops.dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Existing regulations for both gas and
hazardous liquid pipelines require
operators to have emergency procedures
to address pipeline emergencies. The
key element of these requirements,
which are located at 49 CFR 192.615
and 195.402(e), is to plan response
before the emergency occurs. Because
pipelines are often located in public
space rather than in controlled access
areas, planning emergency response
must include more than internal plans.
The regulations explicitly require that
operators include procedures for
planning with fire, police and other
public officials to ensure a coordinated
response. It is also important to plan a
coordinated response with owners of
other utilities in the vicinity of the
pipeline. The operations of these
utilities may provide sources of ignition
for the product released from a pipeline,
may increase the burning time of fires
that have already started, or may delay
responders who are attempting to make
the situation safe rapidly.
In the evening of April 7, 2003, a
breakout tank exploded and
subsequently ignited in Glenpool,
Oklahoma. The fire continued to burn
and increased in the early morning of
April 8 when electric lines affected by
the previous day’s explosion and fire
fell into a dike. The diesel fuel being
contained in the dike ignited, expanding
the fire. This resulted in a temporary
suspension of firefighting and damaged
additional facilities. While there were
no injuries or fatalities, the fire burned
for over 20 hours; the cost of the
accident exceeded two million dollars;
residents were evacuated; and schools
were closed. The National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
conducted an investigation of the
accident. In its report, the NTSB found
that lack of a coordinated emergency
response contributed to the severity of
the accident. The NTSB noted that the
existing pipeline safety regulations on
emergency procedures do not explicitly
require that operators have procedures
for preplanning with electric and other
utilities.
A previous accident also points to the
need for better coordination of
emergency response. On March 1, 1998,
a pipeline failure occurred when a raven
landed on a power line. This resulted in
a fault current that impacted a gas
pipeline in Anchorage, Alaska. The
situation very quickly developed into an
explosion at the public electric
company’s plant. Although preplanning
was required by regulation, the pipeline
operator did not coordinate emergency
response well with the fire department
resulting in delays in shutting off the
flow of gas. This resulted in additional
fire damage. Inadequate coordination
with the electric company also
contributed to this delay.
These accidents point to the need for
operators to plan with utilities on how
to coordinate actions needed in
responding to a pipeline emergency.
This preplanning will result in better
coordination when an emergency
occurs.
II. Advisory Bulletin ADB–05–03
To: Owners and Operators of Natural
Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Facilities in the Vicinity of Electric and
other Utilities.
Subject: Preplanning with owners of
electric and other utilities for
VerDate jul<14>2003 16:20 May 20, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM 23MYN1

<<<PAGE 2>>>

29558 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 98 / Monday, May 23, 2005 / Notices
coordinated response to pipeline
emergencies.
Purpose: To advise operators of
pipeline facilities located near electric
and other utilities of the need to preplan
emergency response with the owners of
those electric and other utilities to
ensure better coordination of response,
and reduced damages, when a pipeline
emergency occurs.
Advisory: Operators of pipeline
facilities are required to plan emergency
response before an emergency happens.
The regulations include required
elements of emergency plans and
procedures. In planning emergency
response, an operator should carefully
look at the environment surrounding the
pipeline facility and the risks that the
environment will pose in the event of a
pipeline emergency. Electric and other
utilities may pose sources of ignition or
may provide additional fuel for fires.
The operations of these utilities may
make response to a pipeline emergency
by firefighters or the pipeline operator
more difficult. Preplanning with these
utilities will help the operator identify
issues that may arise in responding to
pipeline emergencies and plan effective
response before there is an emergency.
This will improve the coordination of
emergency response and reduce delays.
OPS advises pipeline operators to
include within their emergency
response planning outreach to owners of
electric and other utilities in order to
preplan and coordinate response to
pipeline emergencies.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 17,
2005.
Theodore L. Willke,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Pipeline
Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–10202 Filed 5–20–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
VerDate 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