{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-13-0007","title":"Williams West, Gas and Liquids — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2014-05-08","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-13-0007 response to Williams West, Gas and Liquids concerning 195.1.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-13-0007.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-13-0007.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-13-0007","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/2013/Williams-PI-13-0007-05-08-2014-Part195.1.pdf","body":"<<>>\n\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\n1200 New Jersey Ave, S.E.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nMAY - 6 2014\nMr. Jared Ellsworth, P.E.\nManager, Pipeline Safety\nWilliams West, Gas and Liquids\n295 Chipeta Way\nSalt Lake City, UT 84108\nDear Mr. Ellsworth:\nFollowing a July 15, 2013, preliminary determination ofthe Director, Western Region, Pipeline\nand Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), by letter dated August 27, 2013,\nWilliams Field Services Company (Williams) requested an interpretation of the applicability of\nthe Federal hazardous liquid pipeline safety regulations at 49 CFR Part 195 to certain facilities it\noperates. Specifically, you asked whether the exemption for \"in-plant piping systems\" in 49\nCFR 195.1(b)(8) applies to a pipeline operated by Williams that transports highly volatile liquid\n(HVL) from a fenced product storage facility across river and private road crossings to another\nfenced location where HVL processing equipment is located. In addition, you asked whether the\ntanks that receive product from the incoming pipeline meet the breakout tank definition in\n§ 195.2.\nFirst, it should be noted that§ 195.l(a)(l) states, in general, that \"any pipeline that transports a\nhighly volatile liquid is regulated.\" The list of exemptions in paragraph (b) are narrowly defined.\nIn its entirety, the exemption for in-plant piping systems in § 195.1 (b )(8) cited by Williams reads\nas follows:\n§ 195.1 Which pipelines are covered by this Part?\n(a) Covered. Except for the pipelines listed in paragraph (b) of this\nSection, this Part applies to pipeline facilities and the transportation of\nhazardous liquids or carbon dioxide associated with those facilities in or\naffecting interstate or foreign commerce, including pipeline facilities on\nthe Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Covered pipelines include, but are not\nlimited to:\n(1) Any pipeline that transports a highly volatile liquid;\n(2) ...\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written\nclarifications of the Regulations ( 49 CFR Parts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect\nthe agency's current application of the regulations to the specific facts presented by the person requesting the\nclarification. Interpretations do not create legally-enforceable rights or obligations and are provided to help the\npublic understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<>>\n\n2\n(b) Excepted. This Part does not apply to any of the following:\n(1) ...\n(8) Transportation of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide through onshore\nproduction (including flow lines), refining, or manufacturing facilities or\nstorage or in-plant piping systems associated with such facilities;\nBased on the information provided in your request, it appears that the facilities involved are\nstorage and processing facilities, not production, manufacturing, or refining facilities. Therefore,\nthe exemption for \"in-plant piping systems associated with such facilities\" would not apply. In\naddition, you stated that the HVL pipeline running between the two fenced locations crosses a\nstream. A failure of the pipeline could potentially impact the water in the stream which in tum,\ncould impact the safety of other properties beyond Williams' property. In some circumstances, a\npipeline transporting hazardous liquids across rivers or streams can be subject to the regulations\neven if the same entity owns the land on either side of the river or strearn.1\nWith regard to your second question, under§ 195.2 a breakout tank is defined as:\nBreakout tank means a tank used to (a) relieve surges in a hazardous liquid pipeline\nsystem or (b) receive and store hazardous liquid transported by a pipeline for reinjection\nand continued transportation by pipeline.\nIn this case, the HVL is received from the incoming pipeline, stored in the tanks and/or\ntransported to and from the HVL processing area, and ultimately reinjected into a pipeline for\ncontinued transportation. Therefore, these tanks appear to meet the definition of breakout tanks.\nPlease note that this response to your August 27, 2013, request reflects PHMSA's preliminary\nviews of the applicability of Part 195 regulations based on the limited information of the\ndescription of the facilities in your letter. PHMSA may need to collect additional information\nand possibly conduct a site visit to make a final determination.\nIf we can be of further assistance, please contact Tewabe Asebe of my staff at 202-366-5523.\n/\n/~\nDirector, Office of Standards\nand Rulemaking\n1 In some states, the land underneath the river or stream bed is deeded to the property owner.\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written\nclarifications of the Regulations ( 49 CFR Parts 190-199) in the form of interpretation letters. These letters reflect\nthe agency's current application of the regulations to the specific facts presented by the person requesting the\nclarification. Interpretations do not create legally-enforceable rights or obligations and are provided to help the\npublic understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<>>\n\nAugust27, 2013\nMr. Jeffrey D. Wiese\nAssociate Administrator for Pipeline Safety\nOffice of Pipeline Safety (PHP-30)\nPHMSA, U.S. Department of Transportation\n1200 New Jersey Ave., SE\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nRE: Request for Written Regulatory Interpretation\nWilliams Field Services Company - OPI D #30826\nDear Mr. Wiese:\nWilliams Field Services Company, in response to a July 15, 2013 letter received from the\nDOT/PHMSA, Western Region, respectfully seeks, pursuant to CFR 49, Part 190.11 (b)(1 ).\nofficial interpretation answering the two questions detailed below regarding CFR 49, Parts\n195.1 (b)(8) and 195.2. Williams believes current operation of the subject pipeline is fully\ncompliant with applicable regulatory requirements.\n1. Is a plant pipeline used to transfer HVL product to a fenced storage tank facility located\non plant property but outside the plant fence and upstream of a pressure influencing\ndevice, subject to 49 CFR Part 195 pipeline safety regulations?\n• CFR 49, Part 195.1 (b)(8) exempts in-plant piping systems and associated\nfacilities, such as storage.\n2. Are storage tanks used only to receive and store product transferred from a plant and not\nintended to relieve surges or to receive and store hazardous liquids transported by a\npipeline for reinjection and continued transportation by pipeline considered breakout\ntanks?\n• CFR, 49, Part 195.2 Definitions. Breakout tank means a tank used to (a) relieve\nsurges in a hazardous liquid pipeline system or (b) receive and store hazardous\nliquid transported by a pipeline for reinjection and continued transportation by\npipeline.\nPlease see the attached schematic depicting the transfer pipeline and plant storage tank facility\n(Attachment 1 ).\nSincerely,\nUuUf!t-\nJared Ellsworth, P.E.\nWilliams West- Gas and Liquids\nManager- Pipeline Safety\n295 Chipeta Way\nSalt Lake City, UT 84108\nOffice: 801 .584.6539\nMobile: 801.243.5365\nAttachment (1)\ncc: Chris Hoidal\n\n<<>>\n\nQJ\nc\nQJ\na..\n\"'0\nQJ\n+-1\nco\n::::J\n01\nQJ\nex:\n~\n