{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-73-0108","title":"The Pipe Line Development Company — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1973-04-30","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-73-0108 response to The Pipe Line Development Company concerning 192.153.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-73-0108.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-73-0108.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-73-0108","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1973/g73-04-30_Gardner_192.153-nlmx.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nPI-73-0108\nApril 30, 1973\nMr. Ronald D. Gardner, Manager\nResearch and Development\nThe Pipe Line Development Company\n1831 Columbus Road\nCleveland, Ohio 44113\nDear Mr. Gardner:\nYour letter of April 10, 1973, enclosed a sketch of a domed, contoured welding cap used to cover a pit hole\nclamp. The cap is field welded for permanency on pipe of not more than 40,000 p.s.i. SMYS. You ask, in effect,\nwhether the design of this cap is governed by the standards of §192.717(c).\nAs here relevant, §192.717(c) is applicable to welded steel plates that are used to repair corrosion pits.\nHowever, the cap described in the sketch appears to be a fitting or component rather than a plate. The\nprovisions of §192.717(c) would therefore not apply to your cap. Although the regulations contained in Part\n192 do not purport to cover the specific design requirements of every type of component or fitting that might\nbe safely welded onto a pipeline, they do, however, set forth general design requirements for pipeline\ncomponents including components fabricated by welding. Thus Subpart D of Part 192, including in particular\n§192.153, would be applicable to the design of the welding cap. Subpart E of Part 192, covering the welding of\nsteel in pipelines, would also have general applicability with reference to the design of welding caps.\nTo the extent that you consider your welding cap to be a branch connection as suggested in your letter, the\napplicable design requirement is set forth in §192.155. That requirement is stated as a performance standard\nrather than a detailed specification, and the means of compliance is left with the designer.\nFor your information, a copy of Part 192 is enclosed. If you have further questions in this regard, we will be\npleased to respond.\nSincerely,\nOriginal signed by:\nJoseph C. Caldwell\nDirector\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nApril 10, 1973\nThe Pipe Line Development Company\n1831 Columbus Road\nCleveland, Ohio 44113\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\nThe Pipe Line Development Company\n1831 Columbus Road\nCleveland, Ohio 44113\nOffice of the Secretary of Transportation\nWashington, D. C. 20590\nAttention: Mr. Joseph C. Caldwell\nDirector\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\nDear Mr. Caldwell:\nEnclosed you will find a sketch of a domed, contoured welding cap (4 inches O.D.). It is used to cover a pit hole\nclamp and is field welded for permanency on pipe not more than 40,000 psi SMYS.\nThe diameter of the cap remains fixed for all sizes of pipe; only the saddle contour changes.\nI have four questions concerning the design of these caps:\n(1) Is the wall thickness of the cap governed by standard pipe design for an intersection or branch\nconnection?\n(2) Is the wall thickness determined by the design principles of a patch repair (Subpart M, part\n192.717, paragraph \"C\") \"of the same or greater thickness than the pipe\"?\n(3) Does the rule apply (Subpart M, part 192.717 paragraph \"C\") \"not more than one half the\ndiameter of the pipe in size\", thereby limiting it to 8 inch nominal pipe and above?\n(4) Can the cap be used on 4-1/2 inches O.D. and 6-5/8 inches O.D. pipe under the definition of an\nintersection or branch connection?\nYour assistance in answering these questions will be greatly appreciated.\nRespectfully yours,\nRonald D. Gardner, Manager\nResearch and Development","truncated":false,"body_characters":3283}