# Arizona Corporation Commission — Pipeline Safety Interpretation

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** PI-74-0108
- **title:** Arizona Corporation Commission — Pipeline Safety Interpretation
- **source type:** guidance
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** guidance
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 1974-04-22
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** PI-74-0108 response to Arizona Corporation Commission concerning 192.13.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-74-0108.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-74-0108.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-74-0108
- **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1974/g74-04-22_Garabrant_192.13%20-%20lmxs.pdf
**body:**

<<<PAGE 1>>>

PI-74-0108
April 22, 1974
Mr.H. R. Garabrant
Arizona Corporation Commission
Utilities Division
1688 West Adams
Phoenix, AR 85007
Dear Mr. Garabrant:
Thank you for you letter of April 10, 1974, asking whether the Federal Gas pipeline safety
standards (49CFR Part 192) require leakage surveys in advance of scheduled street repairs.
As you point out, section 192.723 of the standards sets forth the requirements concerning leakage
surveys. This section requires surveys to be made periodically as provided in the operator's
operating and maintenance plan but not less frequently than every year or every 5 years,
depending on pipeline location. The section does not specifically require surveys in advance of
street construction. However, if such surveys are prescribed in an operating and maintenance
plan, then the operator concerned must conduct them. The procedures of an operating and
maintenance plan are as binding on the operator as the Federal standards (section 192.13(c)).
You enclosed a copy of the Arizona Public Service Company's operating and maintenance plan.
We have reviewed the plan, and it does not appear that any of its provisions would require a
leakage survey in advance of street repairs.
Inasmuch as the Federal standards and the operating and maintenance plan do not require this
type of survey, compliance action based on either the standards or the plan would be
inappropriate. However, if you feel that a leak survey should be required in advance of street
repairs, we suggest that your Commission adopt standards more stringent than Federal standards
for intrastate pipeline facilities.
Sincerely,
/signed/
Joseph C. Caldwell
Director
Office of Pipeline Safety
DB
C:\WP51\INTERPRT\192\723\74-04-22
1

<<<PAGE 2>>>

April 10, 1974
Mr. Joseph C. Caldwell
Office of Pipeline Safety
Department of Transportation
Washington, D.C. 20550
Dear Mr. Caldwell:
I may have threaded on some thin ground or else I am about to do some good when I started
questioning one of the major gas distribution companies in Arizona as to what their policies were
in regards to leakage surveys and repairs ahead of street improvement. A representative of the
company, after receiving my letter of April 8, 1974, told me that I was exceeding my authority
and looking into areas that belonged to the gas company operations only. This may be and I
could use some clarification.
Not only does the public get upset when new streets are dug up for repairs by a utility company,
my personal experience in the past has shown that new street resurfacing, even a thin spray type
seal coat on an asphalt street, slows dissipation of gas through old paving, thus causing greater
gas migration whereby the gas in effect gets closer to a possible source of ignition or increases
the likelihood of planted vegetation damage adjacent to the street. As I understand it "property"
is also to be protected by public law 90-481.
About 25 years ago when working for a gas company, I remember investigating why it seemed
that so many new streets were being cut. We reached the conclusion that it was the issuance of
repair orders as a result of vegetation surveys and customer complaints of dying vegetation that
occurred there before the improvement. It was also conjectured that soil vibration from heavy
equipment could be loosening the crust around pitholes in the pipe as well as better sealing of the
street. At that time for minor street improvements, we were not running a complete thorough
leakage survey, usually only a vegetation survey which appeared to be insufficient.
In view of the above, when the opportunity arises(as in this case) I try to bring to light and
promote coordination and cooperation between people involved in street improvements and the
utility company.
DB
C:\WP51\INTERPRT\192\723\74-04-22
2

<<<PAGE 3>>>

DOT 192.723 does not specifically cover surveys ahead of street improvements unless in
192.723(b)(2)_ "...must be made as frequently as necessary..." could be construed that it is
necessary ahead of a street improvement due to the general knowledge. That investigation
beforehand helps reduce damage to streets and vegetation afterward. If the knowledge is not
generally known, I consider it part of my job to spread the knowledge gained through my
experience for consideration.
Also, DOT 192.613 possible could be quoted in support of requiring such an investigation as this
section is sort of a catch all, but I can't really say that a street improvement is unusual - neither is
it routine in a small town.
I believe my best support lies under DOT 192.17 where the operator filed an operating and
maintenance plan. Under Section III of his plan, I believe I have justification of looking into the
accomplishment of leakage surveys and repairs ahead of street improvements as they are a "civic
improvement".
The situation (not too serious at this time) somewhat puzzles me as I am reasonably sure the
company involved does make such surveys in larger cities, however, they may not be actively
pursuing surveys ahead of street improvements in small towns that they serve. It also may be that
they are just resisting what they may consider governmental interference in their business.
Before I probe deeper in this, I need to know if I have a proper foundation or a leg to stand on.
Arizona has adopted no laws, rules or codes etc. that would be applicable in this case except
those of DOT's.
For the record, it should be noted that the short visit at the job site in the small town in question
was not a part of a formal inspection and no attempt was made to cite the gas company as you
can see from the attached letter. Had it been a part of a formal inspection, I would have had a gas
company representative with me and we would have determined if a leakage survey had been
conducted without the knowledge of the city personnel even though city personnel were not
aware that making a request for leakage surveys ahead of street improvements is a normal and
proper procedure.
Awaiting your comments.
Very truly yours,
Arizona Corporation Commission
H.R. Garabrant, Gas Utilities Safety Engineer
Utilities Division
DB
C:\WP51\INTERPRT\192\723\74-04-22
3

<<<PAGE 4>>>

ENC: as stated.
April 8, 1974
Mr. Pete Watkins
Arizona Public Service Co.
P.O. Box 21666
Phoenix, AR 85036
Dear Mr. Watkins:
On April 3, 1974 I was returning to Phoenix and was passing through the town of Tolleson when
I observed a Municipal Street Paving crew in the process of working on a major street
improvement job 5 or 6 blocks long, on 92nd Ave. North of Van Buren.
On stopping and talking with the crew, I found that the gas company (APS) had properly given
them gas pipe location information. Also, when talking to Mr. Green, the Public Works Director
for Tolleson, I found that he was unaware that it is in the best interest of all concerned to notify
the gas company and other utilities to survey their facilities for needed repairs or replacement of
facilities as soon as the major street improvement is budgeted, preferably at least 3 or 4 months
ahead of the proposed work.
Could you please advise me what APS's standard practices are along this line and if you promote
the request for notice ahead of street improvements?
DB
C:\WP51\INTERPRT\192\723\74-04-22
4

<<<PAGE 5>>>

My definition of a major street improvement is the removal of old paving the width of the street,
grading, adding necessary ballast, compacting, and installing entirely new paving. The job may
or may not include work pertaining to curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
A minor improvements consists of adding 2" or less additional paving on top of existing paving.
I don't know if there is sufficient time available in this case, but a leakage survey and repairs if
needed would be desirable as it is a shame to have new streets torn up due to lack of surveys and
coordination of repairs.
Sincerely,
Arizona Corporation Commission
H.R. Garabrant
Gas Utilities Safety Engineer
Utilities Division
ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY A.C.C.No. 982
Phoenix, Arizona Original Sheet No.1
Filed by: B. Paul Hart
Title: Manager, Rate Services
Date Original Filing: FEB.10, 1970
District: All Company's Gas Areas Effective: Mar.12,1970
Complying with Arizona Corporation Commission Amended General Order U-47 dated Nov. 17,
1969, the following is presented as the Company's plan for operation and maintenance of gas
pipelines.
GAS DISTRIBUTION OPERATING & MAINTENANCE PLAN
GENERAL PLAN
To operate and maintain the Gas Distribution System to give adequate, safe, dependable and
economical gas service to all customers. This plan will comply with the regulations and
standards imposed upon the Company by certificates of convenience and necessity, by county
and city franchises, and by applicable state and federal laws., orders and regulations.
SPECIFIC PLAN
I. New Additions
A. Report of Additions
DB
C:\WP51\INTERPRT\192\723\74-04-22
5

<<<PAGE 6>>>

1. Design according to standards (USA BBB.8-1968).
2. Qualifying tests for design operating conditions (USA BBB.8-1968).
3. Inspection reports verifying construction standards (USA BBB.8-1968).
II. Operating Procedures
A. There shall be methods or means of monitoring and controlling gas distribution
system pressures to provide a margin for safety and to insure adequate gas
supplies to all customers.
B. Records shall be maintained of gas quality, BTU and specific gravity.
C. A periodic inspection of regulator stations, valve stations and system metering
stations will be made. A record will be made of these inspections and ancillary
tests, for odor, leaks, water, drips, valve operation, bleeds, vents, covers and ring,
and encroachment of others.
III. Maintenance Plan
A. The Gas Distribution System (all gas carrying pipes and equipment with
appurtenances, protective devices and materials) will be under regular
surveillance as follows:
1. Systematic patrol using mobile leak detector, where practicable.
2. Barhole testing as necessitated by mobile inspection.
3. Foot patrol and "hand-held" detectors on mains and services not accessible
to mobile patrol.
4. Numbers 1 through 3. to watch for vegetation signs of leakage, changes in
surface conditions, encroachment of other services and civic
improvements.
B. As a follow up to surveys described in A above, APS will where required:
1. Make replacement and abandonments ordered on mains and equipment
found unsafe under operating conditions.
2. Accelerate patrols and leak surveys scheduled.
3. Downgrade operating conditions, where pipe conditions require.
4. Upgrade or delay further patrols/inspections, when pipe and leakage tests
warrant.
C. Repairs made and tested shall be reported as completed.
DB
C:\WP51\INTERPRT\192\723\74-04-22
6

<<<PAGE 7>>>

D. Abandonments records shall be made from orders directing this action.
IV. Emergency Plan pursuant to USA B31.8-1968 will be maintained.
V. Welders qualifications test shall be in accordance with USA B31.8-1968 and references,
which include sampling of field welds selected for quality control.
VI. Pipeline Inspection Reports (corrosion)
Whenever the pipe distribution system is uncovered, a pipe inspection report shall be
made on suitable form and entered in record.
VII. Odor reports shall be made from monthly tests and random points.
VIII. Cathodic records shall show test conducted on the basis of engineering requirements.
IX. Safety rules shall be promulgated for all classifications of APS personnel working with
the Gas Distribution System.
X. Accidents/incidents will be reported as required by applicable law and regulations.
XI. Public information program for location and underground facilities and full-time service
personnel on call for emergency service are maintained.
DB
C:\WP51\INTERPRT\192\723\74-04-22
7
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 11774
