{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-72-053","title":"Pipe Line Service Company — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1972-12-14","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-72-053 response to Pipe Line Service Company concerning 192.63.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-72-053.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-72-053.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-72-053","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1972/PI72053.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nMr. J. F. Pfrank\nVice President Operations\nPipe Line Service Company\n3240 North Mannheim Road\nFranklin Park, Illinois 60131\nDear Mr. Pfrank:\nThis is in response to your letter of November 7, 1972, concerning the marking requirements for\ngas pipe as set forth in 49 CFR §192.63. You recommend that the standards for marking be\namended to eliminate weight per foot and replace it with the wall thickness.\nSection 192.63 does not in itself state a requirement that pipe be marked to show weight per foot.\nRather, that regulation requires that the pipe be marked as prescribed in the specification or\nstandard to which it was manufactured. Thus, for example, marking on pipe manufactured to API\n5L or 5LX would be required to show weight per foot. In such cases, however, the\nmanufacturer's pipe tables would provide a ready cross-reference showing wall thickness.\nIt is recognized that for your purposes wall thickness may be more meaningful than weight per\nfoot. However, for other persons such as shippers, the weight per foot may be more use.\nInasmuch as marking requirements for weight per foot follow industry-developed standards and\nserve a useful purpose, and since information on wall thickness is readily available, there does not\nappear to be a basis at this time for substituting wall thickness for weight per foot as a regulatory\nmatter.\nYour comments stating your position will be retained and reviewed, along with all other relevant\nmaterial, at such time in the future as any amendments are considered for §192.63.\nSincerely,\n/signed/\nJoseph C. Caldwell\nDirector\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\192\\63\\72-12-14\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\192\\63\\72-12-14\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":1705}