{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-71-043","title":"Indiana Public Service Commission — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1971-03-25","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-71-043 response to Indiana Public Service Commission concerning 191.11.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-71-043.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-71-043.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-71-043","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1971/PI71043.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nMarch 25, 1971\nMr. D. J. Hendrickson\nChief, Utility Safety Section\nIndiana Public Service Commission\n901 State Office Building\nIndianapolis, Indiana 46204\nDear Mr. Hendrickson:\nThis is in reply to your letter of February 25, 1971, concerning\ninterpretation of our leak reporting forms.\nThe type of damage which we require to be reported is determined\nby our responsibility under the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act,\nnamely, the regulation of the transportation of gas in the\ninterest of safety. Therefore, we are not interested in\nreceiving information on incidents which result in damage to an\noperator's equipment, where no gas leak is involved. We are\ninterested in receiving information on damage incurred where a\nleak is present whether or not the damage results from the gas\nleak, and whether or not the operator was reimbursed by the party\ncausing the damage. This damage would quite properly include the\nloss of gas resulting from damage caused by others.\nSince the document you enclosed was not official interpretation\nby the Office of Pipeline Safety, the interpretation stated in\nthis letter, rather than that document, should be followed.\nIf we can be of further assistance to you, please let us know.\nSincerely,\nJoseph C. Caldwell\nActing Director\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\ndal\\191\\11\\71-03-25\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nFebruary 25, 1971\nMr. Joseph C. Caldwell, Acting Director\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\n800 Independence Avenue, S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nDear Mr. Caldwell:\nPlease note underlined sections of the attached release from\nthe A.G.A. Operating Section.\nAre not (1) and (2) contradictory? If you are interested in\nthe \"overall amounts of money expended for repairs\" why should\nnot the cost of repair of damages where no leak resulted also be\nincluded? It seems to us rather incidental whether or not a leak\nresulted from the damage as long as the damage was done and the\noperator had the expense of repairing the same.\nAlso, in case of a loss of a large amount of gas, resulting\nfrom such damage by others, would not the value of the gas lost\nbe part of the operator's cost?\nWe assume the operators total cost of repair s hould be\nreported regardless of whether or not he was reimbursed for any\namount of this cost by the party causing such damage.\nVery truly yours,\nD. J. Hendrickson\nChief, Utility Safety Section\ndal\\191\\11\\71-03-25\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":2366}