{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-24-0003","title":"Torrance Pipeline Company LLC — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2024-07-02","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-24-0003 response to Torrance Pipeline Company LLC concerning 195.452.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-24-0003.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-24-0003.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-24-0003","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2024-07/Torrance-Pipeline-Company-PI-24-0003-07-01-2024-Part195.452.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration July 2, 2024\nMr. Thomas J. McLane\nDirector, Regulatory Compliance\nTorrance Pipeline Company LLC\n12851 E 166th Street\nCerritos, CA 90703\nDear Mr. McLane:\nIn a letter to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), dated\nFebruary 8, 2024, you requested an interpretation of the Federal pipeline safety regulations in\n49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 195 with respect to integrity management (IM)\nrequirements under § 195.452 for pipelines in high consequence areas (HCA).\nYou stated that Torrance Pipeline Company (TPC) has been in communication with PHMSA\nwith regards to an M-141, an 8-inch jet fuel pipeline owned by TPC and located in Southern\nCalifornia. You stated that a 2015 repair plan prepared by the prior operator of the pipeline\nincluded a conservative application of one of the potential repair conditions triggering 180-day\nremediation under § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(G).\nYou stated since TPC took over ownership of the pipeline in July 2016 it has undertaken a\ncomprehensive review of the pipeline under Part 195, including two inline inspections (ILI)\nperformed in 2019 and 2023. You stated review of the ILI inspection results has revealed that\nthe prior operator categorized 225 linear anomalies in the pipeline as actionable \"cracks\" that\nrequire 180-day evaluation and remediation under § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(G) even though they did\nnot actually meet the threshold for requiring repair. You stated because the prior operator\nincorrectly classified them as 180-day repair conditions, TPC was then inherently required to\nfollow the 2015 repair plan submitted to California Office of Pipeline Safety State Fire Marshal\n(CALFIRE) to address the remaining anomalies within the 180-day repair plan. You stated,\nhowever, your investigation revealed that the prior pipeline operator never conducted any\nexcavation or other field verification of the pipeline to confirm whether the anomalies flagged by\nits inspections were actual cracks in the pipeline.\nYou stated TPC has since performed extensive analysis of the physical pipeline conditions,\nincluding nondestructive testing, material analysis of pipe cutouts, and data analysis. You stated\nyou also have confirmed that no long seam or crack related failures had ever occurred in this\nsystem at working pressures or during a hydrostatic test. You stated in September 2023 you ran\na nondestructive testing (NDT) crack tool and confirmed that 100 percent of the remaining\nunrepaired anomalies outlined by the 2015 previous owner’s repair plan do not meet repair\ncriteria. You asked PHMSA to provide an interpretation of whether §195.452 requirements\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 are not generally applicable, do not create legally-enforceable rights or\nobligations, and are provided to help the specific requestor understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nPage 2 of 2\nallow you to carry out a revised repair plan based on actionable anomalies supported by your\ndata. Also, you requested that PHMSA close or remove Integrity Assurance Notifications\n(formerly IMDB) #560 / 19-167314 and allow TPC to establish a new repair plan and schedule\nto complete any remaining conditional repairs per the PHMSA-compliant TPC IM plan.\nSection 195.452(h)(2) requires certain listed anomalies to be scheduled for evaluation and\nremediation within 180 days. Discovery of a condition that does not meet the threshold of a 180-\nday condition would not normally require repair within 180 days. However, § 195.452 is a\nminimum standard. When operating and maintaining a pipeline system, an operator sometimes\nwill make conservative assumptions or otherwise implement its IM program to exceed the\nminimum requirements established by regulation to ensure the safety of pipeline. Where an\noperator’s IM plan treats more conservative conditions as 180-day conditions, the operator must\nfollow its IM plan and repair the conditions according to the timeline set forth in the plan.\nYou stated your investigation revealed that the prior pipeline operator did not conduct any\nexcavation or other field verification of the pipeline to confirm whether the anomalies flagged by\nits inspection were actual cracks in the pipeline. Also, you stated TPC has since performed\nextensive analysis of the physical pipeline conditions, including nondestructive testing, material\nanalysis of pipe cutouts, and data analysis. In this case, you suggest certain conditions on your\npipeline previously thought to be 180-day conditions do not actually qualify as 180-day\nconditions. Furthermore, you ask PHMSA to approve and/or concur with TPC’s reassessment of\nthe anomalies and establishment of a new repair plan.\nYou are correct that § 195.452(f) states,\n“An operator must continually change the program to\nreflect operating experience, conclusions drawn from results of the integrity assessments, and\nother maintenance and surveillance data, and evaluation of consequences of a failure on the high\nconsequence area.” This regulation recognizes operators will amend their plans from time to\ntime. Therefore, you are not precluded from amending the 2015 repair plan. The regulator, in\nthis case CALFIRE, could review the new repair plan to determine if it complies with the\nregulation and does not otherwise create an unsafe condition.\nAs to your request for PHMSA to close or remove Integrity Assurance Notification 19-167314,\nCALFIRE decides whether and when to change the status of the notification.\nIf we can be of further assistance, please contact Tewabe Asebe at 202-366-5523.\nSincerely,\nJohn A. Gale\nDirector, Office of Standards\nand Rulemaking\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 are not generally applicable, do not create legally-enforceable rights or\nobligations, and are provided to help the specific requestor understand how to comply with the regulations.\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n~ rrance\nl ; i~ eline Company LLC\nTorrance Pipeline\nCompany LLC\n12851 E 166~ St,\nCemtos, CA 90703\nwww.pbfenergy.com\nFebruary 8, 2024\nVia E-mail\nMr. John A. Gale\nDirector, Office of Standards and Rulemaking\nUnited States Department of Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (\"PHMSA\")\nOffice of Pipeline and Hazmat Safety Standards and Rulemaking\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nEmail: john.gale@dot.gov\nRe: Request for Interpretation and Approval/Concurrence Under 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.452 - Pipeline Integrity Management in High Consequence Areas\nDear Mr. Gale:\nThis letter is a request for PHMSA's interpretation and approval of, and/or concurrence with, a\nrevised element of an integrity management program pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 195.452 et seq.\nSpecifically, Torrance Pipeline Company (TPC) has been in communication with PHMSA with\nregards to the above referenced and has gathered information indicating that a 2015 repair plan\nprepared by the prior operator of the M-141 8-inch jet fuel pipeline now owned by TPC (the\n\"Pipeline\") included a critical misinterpretation of one of the potential repair conditions triggering\n180-day remediation under 49 C.F.R. § 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(G).\nAs Section 195.452(f) provides, operators of hazardous liquid pipelines regulated by § 195.l(a)\nand § 195.452 not only must develop an integrity management program, but importantly, also\n\"must continually change the program to reflect operating experience, conclusions drawn from\nresults of the integrity assessments, and other maintenance and surveillance data, and evaluation\nof consequences of a failure on the high consequence area.\"\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nSince taking ownership of the Pipeline in July 2016, TPC has undertaken a comprehensive review\nof the Pipeline under 49 C.F.R. Part 195, including two inline inspections (ILI) performed in\nOctober 2019 and 2023. This review has revealed that, in 2015, the prior operator performed an\nIntegrity Seam Assessment of the Pipeline pursuant to Section§ 195.452 using a Rosen UCD +\nTFI tool, and based on that data, the prior operator incorrectly categorized 225 linear anomalies in\nthe Pipeline as actionable \"cracks\" purportedly requiring 180-day evaluation and remediation\nunder 49 C.F.R. § 195 .452(h)( 4)(iii)(G). Inconsistent with its integrity management program, TPC\nwas then inherently required to follow the repair plan submitted to California Office of Pipeline\nSafety State Fire Marshal (OSFM) to address the remaining anomalies from this unsubstantiated\n180-day repair plan.\nSection 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(G) provides in relevant part that \"an operator must schedule evaluation\nand remediation of the following within 180 days of discovery of the condition: ... (G) A potential\ncrack indication that when excavated is determined to be a crack.\" 49 C.F.R.\n§ 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(G) (emphasis added). Here, TPC's investigation revealed that the prior\nPipeline operator failed to conduct any excavation or other field verification of the Pipeline to\nconfirm whether the anomalies flagged by the Rosen tool were actual cracks in the Pipeline.\nBecause of this, the prior operator failed to confirm its blanket characterization of the anomalies\nas \"cracks\" through excavation or any other field work, and its treatment of these anomalies as\n\"cracks\" fails to conform to the regulatory definition provided in Section§ 195.452(h)(4)(iii)(G).\nTPC has since performed extensive analysis of the physical Pipeline conditions, including non-\ndestructive testing, material analysis of pipe cutouts, and data analysis using the latest industry\ntechnology and standards. TPC also has confirmed that no long seam or crack related failures had\never occurred in this system at working pressures or during a hydrostatic test. To further strengthen\nits reassessment of the Pipeline anomalies, in September of 2023, TPC ran an NDT Global UCx\nEclipse state-of-the-art crack tool and confirmed that, of the remaining unrepaired anomalies\noutlined by the 2015 repair plan, 100% of them do not meet repair criteria per any available\nindustry standards, TPC IMP process, nor 49 C.F .R. § 192. 714( d) at the behest of the California\nOffice of the State Fire Marshal.\nAccordingly, pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 190.ll(b), TPC is requesting that PHMSA approve and/or\nconcur with this interpretation and TPC's reassessment of the actionable anomalies with the\nPipeline, allowing TPC to instead carry out a revised repair plan based on actionable anomalies as\nsupported by the data gathered with the state-of-the-art UCx tool run. TPC would also request that\nPHMSA close or remove Integrity Assurance Notifications (formerly IMDB) #560 / 19-167314\nand allow TPC to establish a new repair plan and schedule to complete any remaining conditional\nrepairs per the PHMSA compliant TPC Integrity Management Plan.\nWe appreciate your attention and assistance on this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if\nyou have any questions or want to discuss any of these issues in more detail.\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nVery truly yours,\nr-~\nThomas J. McLane\nDirector, Regulatory Compliance\ncc. Jim Hosler, Chief of Pipeline Safety and CUPA Programs. CAL FIRE- Office of the State Fire Marshal,\nPipeline Safety Division\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>","truncated":false,"body_characters":11929}