{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-74-0130","title":"Stephen L. Grossman — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1974-08-06","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-74-0130 concerning 195.210.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-74-0130.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-74-0130.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-74-0130","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1974/g74-08-06_Grossman_195.210-nlmx.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nPI-74-0130\nAugust 6, 1974\nInterpretation of 49 CFR §195.210\nDeputy Director, OPS, TES-31\nAssistant General Counsel, Regulation\nThis refers to your memo of July 18, 1974, regarding an interpretation of 49 CFR §195.210. We have noted\nyour comments on this interpretation and agree with your interim interpretation on this section which is\nconsistent with previous interpretations in this regard.\nWe feel that a rule change in this matter should be considered in the evaluation in the over-all updating of the\nhazardous liquid regulations. We are, therefore, placing this recommendation in the project files for\nconsideration at that time.\nSigned\nCesar DeLeon, TES-31\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nUnites States Government\nDepartment of Transportation\nOffice of the Secretary\nMEMORANDUM\nJuly 18, 1974\nSUBJECT: Interpretation of 49 CFR §195.210\nFROM: Assistant General Counsel, Regulation\nTO: Deputy Director, OPS, TES-31\nIn view of the need for clarification of the requirements of 49 CFR § 195.210(b) and prior inconsistent\ninterpretations of its provisions provided by this office, it is recommended that this issue be resolved by\nmodification of the regulation. A draft amendment is attached (Attachment A). Because of the increasing\nfrequency with which this question is being raised, this amendment should be published for public comment\nas soon as possible.\nIn the interim it is our legal opinion that §195.210(b) requires an operator to provide twelve inches additional\npipeline cover in any case in which the operator is a voluntary participant, through granting permission for\nright-of-way encroachment or otherwise, to the reduction of the distance between a pipeline and adjacent\nprivate dwellings or buildings in which people work, congregate or assemble to less than 50 feet.\nStephen L. Grossman\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nATTACHMENT A\n. . . . In consideration of the foregoing, it is proposed to amend Subchapter B of Chapter I of Title 49,\nCode of Federal Regulations, as follows:\n1. By revising § 195.210 to read as follows:\n§ 195.210 Pipeline location.\nA pipeline route or right-of-way must be selected to avoid, as far as practical, areas containing\nprivate dwellings and other buildings or places of public assemblage in which persons work, congregate\nor assemble.\n2. By adding a subparagraph (e) to § 195.402 to read as follows:\n§ 195.402 General requirements.\n* * * * *\n(e) A pipeline may not be operated within 50 feet of any private dwelling, or any\nbuilding or place of public assembly in which persons work, congregate or assemble, unless it is\nprovided with at least 12 inches of cover in addition to that prescribed in § 195.248.","truncated":false,"body_characters":2640}