{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-75-024","title":"Oklahoma Natural Gas Company — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1975-05-30","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-75-024 response to Oklahoma Natural Gas Company concerning 192.111.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-75-024.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-75-024.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-75-024","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1975/PI75024.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nMay 30, 1975\nMr. J. H. Glamser\nVice President\nOklahoma Natural Gas Company\nP.O. Box 871\nTulsa, Oklahoma 74102\nDear Mr. Glamser:\nThis responds to your letter of April 23, 1975, asking whether in rebuilding a pipeline under the\nright-of-way of a public highway in a Class 1 location, a design factor of 0.50 or 0.60 should be\nused in the design formula in 49 CFR 192.105 for steel pipe.\nWhere steel pipe in a Class 1 location, crosses without a casing, or makes a parallel encroachment\non a highway right-of-way, Section 192.111(b)(2) requires that a design factor of 0.60 or less by\nused.\nIn rebuilding the pipeline, the use of a design factor of 0.60 would satisfy Section 192.111(b)(2).\nThe term \"or less\" in Section 192.111(b) should not be construed as requiring that a lower design\nfactor, e.g., 0.50, be used in certain circumstances. Rather, the term \"or less\" permits the pipe at\nthe operator's discretion, to be designed for greater strength than that provided by a design factor\nof 0.60.\nWe trust this satisfactorily answers your inquiry.\nSincerely,\nJoseph C. Caldwell\nDirector\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\ndal\\192\\111\\75-05-30","truncated":false,"body_characters":1147}