{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-24-0009","title":"Gulf Coast Ammonia — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2025-07-28","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-24-0009 response to Gulf Coast Ammonia concerning 195.2.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-24-0009.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-24-0009.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-24-0009","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2025-08/Gulf-Coast-Ammonia-PI-24-0009-12-16-2024-Part195-2-195b-8.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration July 28, 2025\nMr. Kenneth A. Koye\nChief Executive Officer\nGulf Coast Ammonia LLC\n435 Fifth Street South\nTexas City, TX 77590\nDear Mr. Koye:\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nIn a letter dated July 16, 2024, Gulf Coast Ammonia, LLC (GCA) asked the Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety (PHMSA) to provide a\nwritten regulatory interpretation regarding the applicability of the hazardous liquid pipeline\nsafety standards in 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 195 to a refrigerated bulk\ncommodity anhydrous ammonia storage tank (AAT) in Texas City, Texas. Citing the definition\nof a breakout tank in 49 CFR § 195.2 and the exception for production facilities in 49 CFR\n§ 195.1(b)(8),1 GCA asks PHMSA to agree that Part 195 does not apply to the AAT in any of\nfive different operating scenarios.2\nAs explained in more detail below, the AAT does not qualify for the exception in 49 CFR\n§ 195.1(b)(8) that applies to production facilities. And while PHMSA agrees that the AAT does\nnot qualify as a breakout tank in three of the five operating scenarios, PHMSA reaches the\nopposite conclusion for the other two operating scenarios. For that reason, PHMSA cannot\nconclude that the Part 195 regulations do not apply to the AAT.\nBackground\nAccording to GCA, the AAT is a full-containment, double-walled, 70,000 metric-ton refrigerated\nstorage tank located on the grounds of the Advario Texas City marine terminal. A 3,600 metric-\nton per day (MTPD) anhydrous ammonia production facility (Production Facility) is located\napproximately 2 ¾ miles away from the AAT. The AAT is connected to the Production Facility\nby a bidirectional, 8-inch intrastate pipeline called the Cold Ammonia Pipeline (CAP). The CAP\nis a hazardous liquids pipeline subject to regulation under Part 195. PHMSA understands the\n1 GCA cited to § 195.1(b)(7), but in 2008 the production exception was redesignated from § 195.1(b)(7) to\n§ 195.1(b)(8). For consistency with existing code, PHMSA refers to the exception as § 195.1(b)(8).\n2 GCA notes that PHMSA’s response to each of these scenarios is important because the AAT “was designed and\nconstructed in accordance with the API 652 Code – Tank Systems for Refrigerated Liquefied Gas Storage rather\nthan to Part 195 standards for breakout tanks.”.The 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\n2\nCAP traverses public and private rights-of-way between the AAT and the Production Facility on\nland that is not otherwise owned by GCA.\nGCA states that the AAT will be used to receive and store commodity-grade anhydrous ammonia\nproduced at the Production Facility, primarily for the purpose of transferring that product to\nmarine vessels for further transportation. The CAP will be used to transport the anhydrous\nammonia from the Production Facility to the AAT. In some situations, including during\noperations related to start-up and commissioning, the CAP will also be used to transport\nanhydrous ammonia from the ATT to the Production Facility.\nGCA intends to sell a portion of the anhydrous ammonia produced at the Production Facility to a\nthird party, Ascend Performance Materials (Ascend). Ascend would use a separate 6-inch\npipeline (Ascend Line) to transport the anhydrous ammonia from the Production Facility to\nanother facility located approximately 23 miles away in Alvin, Texas. Like the CAP, the Part\n195 regulations would apply to the Ascend Line. The Ascend Line would also occasionally\nreceive anhydrous ammonia that is transported from the AAT to the Production Facility through\nthe CAP. GCA states that the AAT would not be used to provide surge protection for the CAP,\nthe Ascend Line, or any other pipeline facility that is subject to regulation under Part 195.\nRelevant Regulations\nThe following regulations are relevant in responding to GCA’s request for interpretation:\n49 CFR § 195.1 – Which pipelines are covered by this Part?\n(a) Covered. Except for the pipelines listed in paragraph (b) of this Section, this\nPart applies to pipeline facilities and the transportation of hazardous liquids or carbon\ndioxide associated with those facilities in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce,\nincluding pipeline facilities on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).\n(b) Excepted. This Part does not apply to any of the following…\n(8) Transportation of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide through onshore\nproduction (including flow lines), refining, or manufacturing facilities or storage or in-\nplant piping systems associated with such facilities;\n49 CFR § 195.2 – Definitions.\nBreakout tank means a tank used to\n(a) relieve surges in a hazardous liquid pipeline system or\n(b) receive and store hazardous liquid transported by a pipeline for reinjection and\ncontinued transportation by pipeline.\nHighly volatile liquid or HVL means a hazardous liquid which will form a vapor\ncloud when released to the atmosphere and which has a vapor pressure exceeding 276\nkPa (40 psia) at 37.8 °C (100 °F).\nPipeline or pipeline system means all parts of a pipeline facility through which a\nhazardous liquid or carbon dioxide moves in transportation, including, but not limited to .\n. . breakout tanks.\nPipeline facility means new and existing pipe, rights-of-way and any equipment,\nfacility, or building used in the transportation of hazardous liquids or carbon dioxide.\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations (49 CF\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\n3\nProduction facility means piping or equipment used in the production, extraction,\nrecovery, lifting, stabilization, separation or treating of petroleum or carbon dioxide, or\nassociated storage or measurement. (To be a production facility under this definition,\npiping or equipment must be used in the process of extracting petroleum or carbon\ndioxide from the ground or from facilities where CO2 is produced and preparing it for\ntransportation by pipeline. This includes piping between treatment plants which extract\ncarbon dioxide, and facilities utilized for the injection of carbon dioxide for recovery\noperations.)\nIn addition, the following provisions from the Pipeline Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. § 60101 et seq.\ngovern the authority of PHMSA to regulate breakout tanks:\n49 U.S.C. § 60102 – Purpose and general authority.\n(a) . . . .\n(2) Minimum safety standards. —The Secretary shall prescribe minimum safety\nstandards for pipeline transportation and for pipeline facilities . . . .\n49 U.S. Code § 60101 – Definitions.\n(a) . . . .\n(19) “pipeline transportation” means transporting gas and transporting hazardous\nliquid;\n(22) “transporting hazardous liquid”—(A) means—(i) the movement of hazardous\nliquid by pipeline, or the storage of hazardous liquid incidental to the movement of\nhazardous liquid by pipeline, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce . . . but (B)\ndoes not include moving hazardous liquid through . . . (ii) onshore production, refining,\nor manufacturing facilities; or (iii) storage or in-plant piping systems associated with\nonshore production, refining, or manufacturing facilities;\nAnalysis\nGCA suggests that Part 195 should not apply to the AAT for two reasons: (1) because the AAT\nqualifies for the exception in 49 CFR § 195.1(b)(8) for production facilities and (2) because the\nAAT does not meet the definition of a breakout tank in 49 CFR § 195.2 in any of five different\noperating scenarios. PHMSA addresses each of these contentions below.\nProduction Facility Exception\nSection 195.1(b)(8) states that Part 195 does not apply to the transportation of hazardous liquid\nor carbon dioxide through onshore production (including flow lines), refining, or manufacturing\nfacilities or storage or in-plant piping systems associated with such facilities.3 GCA contends\n3 The definition of “production facility” in § 195.2 is expressly limited to “piping or equipment used in the\nproduction, extraction, recovery, lifting, stabilization, separation or treating of petroleum or carbon dioxide, or\nassociated storage or measurement.” Id. (emphasis added). While subject to regulation as a hazardous liquid,\nanhydrous ammonia does not qualify as carbon dioxide or petroleum under Part 195. See § 195.2 (defining\n“petroleum” and “carbon dioxide”). Because the AAT is only used for the storage of anhydrous ammonia, PHMSA\nis not applying the definition of “production facility” in § 195.2 in analyzing the applicability of that exception in\nthis case.\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations (49 CF\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 4>>>\n\n4\nthat the AAT is eligible for this exception because its function is integral to the operation of the\nProduction Facility. GCA cites to PHMSA interpretation letter PI-01-0103 to support its\nassertion.4\nPHMSA disagrees with GCA’s position for two reasons. First, the AAT is not even located on\nthe grounds of the Production Facility. It is located at the Advario Texas City Marine terminal,\nwhich is more than 2 ¾ miles away. The AAT is also connected to the Production Facility by a\nPart 195-regulated pipeline, the CAP. Tanks used to store anhydrous ammonia produced miles\naway and delivered in a regulated pipeline do not qualify for the exception for production\nfacilities.\nSecond, PHMSA’s interpretation in PI-01-0103 is clearly distinguishable. In PI-01-0103,\nPHMSA concluded that a liquid petroleum gas storage tank met the exception in § 195.1(b)(8)\nbecause the tank was located on the grounds of a crude oil refinery. This interpretation differs\nfrom the AAT, which is not located on the grounds of the Production Facility and receives\nanhydrous ammonia that is produced more than 2 ¾ miles away through a Part 195-regulated\npipeline.5 For these reasons, PHMSA concludes that neither the AAT nor the CAP qualify for\nthe exception for production facilities in 49 U.S.C. § 60101(a)(22)(B) as codified at\n§ 195.1(b)(8).\nBreakout Tank Status\nThe definition of a “breakout tank” is critical for determining application of the pipeline safety\nregulations to certain types of storage. Not all tanks are regulated, only breakout tanks as\ndefined in section 195.2. As PHMSA has explained, “Since its issuance in 1969, Part 195 has\napplied to storage called ‘breakout tankage’ by virtue of the inclusion of that term in the\ndefinition of ‘pipeline system’ or ‘pipeline.’”6 In 1981, PHMSA adopted a definition of\n“breakout tank” to provide greater precision to the regulation by identifying the two kinds of\nstorage functions to which Part 195 applies: “First, tanks used to relieve surges in a hazardous\nliquid pipeline. This is sometimes called working tankage or a form of operating tankage.\nSecond, tanks used to receive hazardous liquid from a pipeline and store it temporarily for\nreinjection into a pipeline for continued transportation.”7\n4 Letter to Mr. Tad A. Schell, Marathon Ashland Pipe Line, LLC, PI-01-0103 (Feb. 15, 2001).\n5 See, e.g., Letter to Mr. Kevin Burke, Buckeye Texas Processing, LLC, PI-20-0004 (Apr. 7, 2020) (noting the\nexception in § 195.1(b)(8) for in-plant piping means piping that is located on the grounds of a plant, see § 195.2).\n6 Transportation of Liquids by Pipeline, 46 Fed. Reg. 38,357, 38,358 (1981). For simplicity, predecessor agencies\nare herein referred to as PHMSA.\n7 Id. A federal district court rejected a challenge to PHMSA’s authority to apply the pipeline safety regulations to\nbreakout tanks in Exxon Corp. v. U.S. Sec'y of Transp., 978 F. Supp. 946, 954 (E.D. Wash. 1997). There, Exxon\nargued PHMSA’s interpretation of storage “incidental” to movement by pipeline was overly broad because it would\npotentially include any storage where any amount of product received by pipeline is subsequently shipped. The\ncourt concluded “[PHMSA’s] assertion of jurisdiction over [Exxon’s] tankage—the tankage connected to the\npipeline—does not exceed [PHMSA’s] statutory authority under the [Pipeline Safety Act]. Insofar as tankage\nconnected to a pipeline, the statute is clearly and unambiguously applicable [to] ‘storage of hazardous liquid\nincidental to the movement of hazardous liquid by pipeline.’” 978 F. Supp. at 954.\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations (49 CF\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 5>>>\n\n5\nSince adoption of the breakout tank definition, PHMSA has issued a number of regulatory\ninterpretations to clarify application of the definition to specific scenarios.8 Relevant to the\npresent question, PHMSA explained in Interpretation PI-11-0006 that re-injecting a hazardous\nliquid into a pipeline even on a temporary basis qualifies the tank as a regulated breakout tank.\nSpecifically, PHMSA concluded that “While the tanks at the La Junta Terminal are\npredominantly used to receive stored liquid propane [by pipeline] for continued transportation by\ntruck, that use is apparently not exclusive. CPPL has re-injected propane from these tanks for\ncontinued transportation by pipeline, and the facilities at the Terminal remain configured in a\nmanner that would permit similar re-injections in the future. Therefore, the tanks described in\nyour letter qualify as breakout tanks under the definition provided in § 195.2.”9\nOperating Scenarios\nBased on the foregoing analysis of the breakout tank definition, PHMSA provides the following\ninterpretation regarding whether the AAT qualifies as a breakout tank in the five different\noperating scenarios presented by GCA. To be a regulated breakout tank under Part 195, the\nAAT must be used to either (1) relieve surges in a hazardous liquid pipeline system or (2)\nreceive and store hazardous liquid transported by a pipeline for reinjection and continued\ntransportation by pipeline. GCA confirms the AAT is not used to relieve surges from the CAP or\nany other hazardous liquid pipelines. Therefore, the AAT would be considered a breakout tank\nonly if it receives product by pipeline for reinjection and continued transportation by pipeline.\n1. Scenario 1: The AAT receives anhydrous ammonia from the Production Facility via the\nregulated CAP. The product will then be transferred to marine vessels at a dedicated\ndock at the marine terminal where the AAT is located.\nPHMSA response: Under Scenario 1, product moves in one direction only from the Production\nFacility to the AAT, where pipeline transportation stops. In this case, the AAT is not used to\nreceive and store hazardous liquid transported by a pipeline for reinjection and continued\ntransportation by pipeline. Therefore, it would not meet the definition of a Part 195 regulated\nbreakout tank.\n2. Scenario 2: The AAT receives commodity grade anhydrous ammonia from marine\nvessels. The anhydrous ammonia is then moved to the Production Facility through the\nCAP to support start up and commissioning of the CAP, the Production Facility, and\nrelated facilities.\nPHMSA response: Similar to Scenario 1, product moves by pipeline in one direction only—in\nthis example, from the AAT to the Production Facility where pipeline transportation stops. In\n8 See, e.g., Letter to Mr. David A. Renli, Sioux Falls Fire Department, PI-95-028 (Jul. 24, 1995) and Letter to Mr.\nRobert M. Mendell, PI-91-030 (Oct. 9, 1991). These interpretations noted storage tanks that meet the definition of a\nbreakout tank are regulated under Part 195 regardless of their occasional use for other functions or when temporarily\ntaken out of service.\n9 Letter to Mr. Todd L. Tullio, ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Co., PI-11-0006 (Aug. 27, 2012). See also Exxon Corp.,\n978 F. Supp. at 952 (“It is undisputed some of the petroleum product received by [Exxon] at its Spokane tanks is\n‘reinjected’ into the Yellowstone Pipeline for ‘continued’ transportation . . . Based on a plain reading of the\nregulation, [Exxon’s] tanks qualify as ‘breakout tanks.’”)\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations (49 CF\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 6>>>\n\n6\nthis case, the AAT does not receive hazardous liquid transported by a pipeline but receives\nproduct from marine vessels only. The AAT would not meet the definition of a Part 195\nregulated breakout tank under this scenario.\n3. Scenario 3: The ammonia from the Production Facility, which was delivered to the AAT\nthrough the CAP, is stored in the AAT and returned to the Production Facility through the\nCAP for commissioning the Production Facility and related facilities.\nPHMSA response: Unlike the first two examples, in Scenario 3 anhydrous ammonia is\ntransported by pipeline to the AAT and then transported by pipeline from the AAT. Since the\ntank is used to receive and store hazardous liquid transported by a pipeline for reinjection and\ncontinued transportation by pipeline, in this example the AAT would be a regulated breakout\ntank under the definition in § 195.2.\n4. Scenario 4: When the Production Facility is not operating and other supplies are not\navailable for Ascend, the AAT receives anhydrous ammonia from marine vessels and the\nanhydrous ammonia is moved from AAT to the Production Facility through the CAP for\nadditional processing before being transferred to the Ascend through the regulated 23-\nmile-long pipeline. Such transfers would only involve ammonia that is delivered to the\nAAT from marine vessels at the marine terminal where the AAT is located.\nPHMSA response: This example is essentially the same as Scenario 2, where product from\nmarine vessels is stored in the AAT and then transferred by pipeline to the Production Facility,\nthe difference being that transportation by pipeline continues beyond the Production Facility.\nPipeline transportation downstream of the Production Facility does not change the classification\nof the AAT. Like Scenario 2, the AAT in this example would not meet the definition of a Part\n195 regulated breakout tank.\n5. Scenario 5: Ammonia that was previously delivered to the AAT through the CAP is\nreturned from the AAT to the Production Facility via the regulated CAP for additional\nprocessing or to supply Ascend when the Production Facility is not operating, and\nanhydrous ammonia has not yet been supplied by marine vessel as contemplated by\nScenario 4.\nPHMSA response: This example is essentially the same as Scenario 3, where product is\ntransported by pipeline from the Production Facility to the AAT and then transferred by pipeline\nback to the Production Facility, the difference being that transportation by pipeline may continue\nbeyond the Production Facility. Since the tank is used to receive and store hazardous liquid\ntransported by pipeline for reinjection and continued transportation by pipeline, in this example\nthe AAT would be a regulated breakout tank under the definition in § 195.2.\nPHMSA understands that once operational, the AAT may be used for more than one of the above\nscenarios. If any combination of uses involves the AAT receiving and storing hazardous liquid\ntransported by a pipeline for reinjection and continued transportation by pipeline, the AAT\nwould be considered a regulated breakout tank.\nThe Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Office of Pipeline Safety provides written clarifications of the Regulations (49 CF\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 7>>>\n\n7\nConclusion\nThe AAT does not fall within the exception of § 195.1(b)(8) for production facilities and would\nmeet the definition of a breakout tank in § 195.2 in two of the five operating scenarios.\nIf we can be of further assistance, please contact Joe Berry at (720) 601-3577.\nSincerely,\nJOHN A\nGALE\nDigitally signed by JOHN\nA GALE\nDate: 2025.08.04\n10:34:35 -04'00'\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 CF\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 8>>>\n\n1\nGulf Coast Ammonia LLC\n435 Fifth Street South\nTexas City, TX 77590\nJuly 16, 2024\nVIA email: pipeline_interp_submittal@dot.gov\nOffice of Pipeline Safety (PHP–30)\nPHMSA\nU.S. Department of Transportation\n1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.\nWashington, DC 20590–0001\nRe: Gulf Coast Ammonia – Regulatory Interpretation Request\nGulf Coast Ammonia LLC (“GCA”) requests a written regulatory interpretation of the application of 49 CFR sections\n195.2 and 195.1(b)(7) to its refrigerated bulk commodity anhydrous ammonia storage tank (“AAT”). GCA believes\nits AAT is not a Part 195 regulated breakout tank.\nAs illustrated in attachment A, GCA’s AAT, is associated with GCA’s 3,600 MTPD anhydrous ammonia production\nfacility in Texas City, Texas (the “Production Facility”). The Production Facility is not yet operational but is\nexpected to begin operations in 2024. The AAT will receive and store commodity grade product from the\nProduction Facility primarily for transfer to marine vessels. The AAT is also integral to Production Facility\noperations because ammonia from the AAT is necessary for start-up of the facility. The AAT is located at the\nAdvario Texas City marine terminal 2 ¾ miles away from the Production Facility. The AAT is a full-containment,\ndouble-walled 70,000 metric-ton refrigerated storage tank.\nThe Production Facility is connected to the AAT by the double-walled Cold Ammonia Pipeline (“CAP”) an 8-inch\nregulated intrastate pipeline. The AAT serves several intended purposes:\n1. The AAT is primarily intended as an export tank for the GCA Production Facility. The AAT will receive\ncommodity grade anhydrous ammonia from the Production Facility which will then be transferred to marine\nvessels at a dedicated dock at the marine terminal where the AAT is located.\n2. In limited circumstances, the AAT may receive commodity grade anhydrous ammonia from marine\nvessels. The anhydrous ammonia may be moved to the Production Facility through the CAP to support start up\nand commissioning of the CAP, the Production Facility and related facilities.\n3. In limited circumstances, ammonia from the Production Facility that is stored in the AAT may be returned\nto the Production Facility through the CAP for commissioning the Production Facility and related facilities.\n\n<<<PAGE 9>>>\n\n2\n4. The AAT is also intended for another operation that has not yet been undertaken. A portion of the\nProduction Facility’s production will be sold to Ascend Performance Materials in Alvin, Texas. In limited\ncircumstances, when the Production Facility is not operating and when other supplies are not available for Ascend,\nthe AAT may receive anhydrous ammonia from marine vessels and the anhydrous ammonia would be moved to\nthe Production Facility through the CAP for additional processing before being transferred to the Ascend facility\nthrough its own regulated 23 mile long 6-inch pipeline. Such transfers would only involve ammonia that is\ndelivered to the AAT from marine vessels at the marine terminal where the AAT is located.\n5. In some limited circumstances, ammonia from the AAT may need to be returned to the Production Facility\nfor additional processing and supply to Ascend when the Production Facility is not producing and replacement\nanhydrous ammonia has not yet been supplied by marine vessel as contemplated by scenario 4. In that situation,\nthe AAT is integral to the operation of the Production Facility in supplying Ascend and the return of the ammonia\nto the Production Facility for additional processing is not for purposes of further transportation.\nThe definition of breakout tank in 195.2, states that “Breakout Tank means a tank used to:\n(a) relieve surges in a hazardous liquid pipeline system or\n(b) receive and store hazardous liquid transported by a pipeline for reinjection and continued transportation\nby pipeline.”\nThe AAT is not used to relieve surges from the CAP or any other hazardous liquid pipeline system. Accordingly, the\nAAT would only be a breakout tank if it receives ammonia by pipeline for reinjection and continued transportation\nby pipeline. GCA has concluded that none of the four potential operating scenarios for the AAT are continued\ntransportation of the ammonia by pipeline for the following reasons:\nOperating Scenario 1: Operations in Scenario 1 would not meet the breakout tank definition because the AAT\nwould receive anhydrous ammonia through the CAP and hold it for transfer for further transportation by marine\nvessel. This situation would not involve further transportation by pipeline which would exclude the AAT from\nregulation as a breakout tank. 49 CFR 195.2.\nOperating Scenario 2: Operations in Scenario 2 would not meet the breakout tank definition because the AAT\nwould receive anhydrous ammonia from marine vessels for delivery to the CAP and use for commissioning the\nProduction Facility and related equipment. Receipt of anhydrous ammonia to the AAT from a marine vessel and\nthen transportation by pipeline is not does not meet the breakout tank definition because the pipeline transfer is\nnot continued transportation by pipeline because the ammonia arrived at the AAT by marine vessel transfer. 49\nCFR 195.2. Additionally, the AAT would not be subject to hazardous liquid pipeline regulations because its function\nis integral to the Production Facility operations as contemplated by 49 CFR 195.1(b)(7) and the guidance provided\non that provision in PHMSA interpretation letter Pl-01-0103.\nOperating Scenario 3: Operations in Scenario 3 would not subject the AAT to hazardous liquid pipeline regulations\nbecause the AAT’s function is integral to the Production Facility operations as contemplated by 49 CFR 195.1(b)(7)\nand the guidance provided on that provision in PHMSA interpretation letter Pl-01-0103.\nOperating Scenario 4: Operations in Scenario 4 would not meet the breakout tank definition because the AAT\nwould receive anhydrous ammonia from marine vessels for delivery to the CAP, processing at the Production\nFacility and delivery to Ascend. Receipt of anhydrous ammonia to the AAT from a marine vessel and then\ntransportation by pipeline does not meet the breakout tank definition because the pipeline transfer is not\ncontinued transportation by pipeline because the ammonia arrived at the AAT by marine vessel transfer.\n\n<<<PAGE 10>>>\n\n3\nOperating Scenario 5: Operations in Scenario 5 would not be subject to hazardous liquid pipeline regulations\nbecause its function is integral to the Production Facility operations as contemplated by 49 CFR 195.1(b)(7) and the\nguidance provided on that provision in PHMSA interpretation letter Pl-01-0103.\nGCA requests PHMSA’s interpretation as to each potential operating scenario individually and collectively, since\nthe AAT is in the process of being commissioned, and at this point, none of the operating scenarios have been\nundertaken. PHMSA’s interpretation may affect how GCA elects to operate the AAT since the AAT was designed\nand constructed in accordance with the API 652 Code – Tank Systems for Refrigerated Liquefied Gas Storage rather\nthan to Part 195 standards for breakout tanks.\nYours Sincerely,\nKenneth A Koye\nChief Executive\nOfficer Gulf Coast\nAmmonia LLC\nkkoye@gulfcoastammonia.com\n\n<<<PAGE 11>>>\n\n4\nAttachment A - GCA Refrigerated Storage\n• Scenario 1: Normally, GCA’s ammonia storage tank (“AAT”) at the Advario Texas City terminal receives and stores ammonia\nfrom the Production Facility via the 8” cold ammonia pipeline (“CAP”), principally for marine export at Advario’ s Dock 68\n• Scenarios 2 & 3: When necessary, ammonia from the AAT may be supplied to the day tank at the Production Facility for start-up or\ncommissioning operations.\n• Scenarios 4 & 5: Occasional reconditioning of ammonia from the AAT at the Production Facility for pipeline supply to Ascend\nProduction Facility at INEOS site Storage Tank at Advario Texas City Marine Terminal\nNH3 from\ni\nH2O (ppm) dosing\nCorrosion Inhibitor\nHeat out\nChillers from storage for start-up operations\nAA\nAmmonia - NH3\n(~59 °F, 100\nHeat in from production to storage\nCommodity ammonia for export\n-27 °F\n0.5 psig\nIron out\nConditioned ammonia from the Production Facility for Ascend’ s Chocolate Bayou specialty chemical plant\nAscend’ s 23 – mile x 6” Pipeline\n7/17/2024 Gulf Coast Ammonia","truncated":false,"body_characters":31174}