{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-72-043","title":"ANSI Standards Committee B16 — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1972-10-20","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-72-043 response to ANSI Standards Committee B16 concerning 192.505.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-72-043.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-72-043.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-72-043","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1972/PI72043.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nMr. Robert V. Warrick, Secretary\nANSI Standards Committee B16\nStandardization of Pipe Flanges,\nFlanges, Fittings, and Valves\n1815 North Fort Myer Drive\nArlington, Virginia 22209\nDear Mr. Warrick:\nThis is in response to your letter of September 8, 1972, concerning strength test requirements for\ncomponents other than pipe as provided in 49 CFR, Section 192.505(d). In lieu of a strength test\nafter installation that section permits certification that a component was tested to at least the\npressure required for the pipeline to which it is being added. You have asked how the\ncertification may be made for components manufactured to industry standards when the required\npipeline pressure is not known at the time of manufacture. You have also asked what constitutes\nan appropriate quality control system under Section 192.505(d).\nA certification meeting the requirements of Section 192.505(d) could be made in one of several\nways. Where a component has been individually tested or manufactured under the required\nquality control system, the component itself could be marked with the manufacturer's name,\nspecification to which manufactured, pressure rating, and test pressure to which the component\n(or prototype) was subjected. Alternatively the certification requirement could be met, for a\nqualified component, by a statement in the manufacturer's catalogue that the component, suitably\nidentified, meets the requirements of an accepted industry standard.\nAs an example, API Standard 6D requires Class 300 valves (pressure rating 720 psig) to\nwithstand a hydrostatic shell test of 1100 psig. An operator who needed to install a valve in an\nexisting pipeline (class 3 location) which has a design pressure of 720 psig and was hydrostatically\ntested to 1080 psig (720 x test factor of 1.5 for a class 3 location), could install a valve purchased\noff the shelf, certified to API 6D, even though the valve was not manufactured with that particular\ninstallation in mind. As your letter recognizes, the operator is responsible for selecting and using\na component that has been certified to a pressure at least as high as the test pressure for the\npipeline in which it is to be installed.\nWith regard to an appropriate quality control system, the standard to be met is set forth in Section\n192.505(d)(2). This is stated as a performance type requirement since it would be impracticable\nto set forth a detailed quality control system for each type of component being manufactured.\nHowever, an acceptable quality control system would consist of two basic elements: continuous\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\192\\505\\72-10-20\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\ninspection by qualified personnel utilizing appropriate inspection equipment, and periodic testing\n(both mechanical and chemical) of materials going into the components.\nI trust this answers your questions. If we may be of further assistance, please call on us.\nSincerely,\n/signed/\nJoseph C. Caldwell\nDirector\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\192\\505\\72-10-20\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":3012}