{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-76-006","title":"Tennessee Public Service Commission — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1976-01-28","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-76-006 response to Tennessee Public Service Commission concerning 192.227.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-76-006.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-76-006.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-76-006","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1976/PI76006.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nJan 28 1976\nMr. John Searcy\nEngineering Division\nTennessee Public Service Commission\nCordell Hull Building\nNashville, Tennessee 37219\nDear Mr. Searcy:\nThe following responds to the questions in your letter of January 2, 1976:\nQuestion 1: Is it a correct interpretation that a welder qualified initially under 192.227(a) in\naccordance with the 1968 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section IX is, in effect,\nrequired by 192.229(c) to re-qualify after 6 months in accordance with API 1104 only, not\nSection IX?\nAnswer: A welder qualified under Section IX of the 1968 edition of the ASME Boiler and\nPressure Vessel Code in accordance with §192.227(a) may not weld unless, within the preceding\nsix calendar months, that welder has had at least one weld tested and found acceptable under\nSection 3 or 6 of API Standard 1104, as required by §192.229(c). Section 192.229(c) does not\nrequire that the welder requalify under API 1104.\nQuestion 2: If the interpretation in Question 1 is correct, can a welder, after 6 months, initially\nqualify again in accordance with Section IX?\nAnswer: Although your interpretation in Question 1 is incorrect, if a welder requalifies under\nSection IX within six months, §192.229(c) would not apply.\nQuestion 3: Is a welder qualified in accordance with 192.227(a) automatically qualified for a year\nin accordance with 192.227(c) for pipe operating at less than 20% SMYS?\nAnswer: As prescribed by §192.229(c), a welder who qualifies under §192.227(a) to weld pipe to\nbe operated at any stress level allowed in the regulations may not weld that pipe, including pipe to\nbe operated at less than 20% of SMYS, for more than six months following his qualification\nunless he has had at least one weld tested and found acceptable under Section 3 or 6 of API\nStandard 1104.\ndal\\192\\227\\76-01-28\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nQuestion 4: Is it a correct interpretation that 192.125(c) is limiting to 100 psi only the ASTM B\n88 type \"L\" copper referred to in 192.125(b), and that copper with a greater wall thickness is not\nrestricted to 100 psi?\nAnswer: 100 psig.\nNo, §192.125(c) prohibits the use of copper pipe of any thickness in operation above\nSincerely,\nCesar DeLeon\nActing Director\nOffice of Pipeline\nSafety Operations\ndal\\192\\227\\76-01-28\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nTENNESSEE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION\nJanuary 2, 1976\nMr. Cesar DeLeon\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\n2100 2nd Street, SW\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nDear Mr. DeLeon:\n1. Is it a correct interpretation that a welder qualified initially under 192.227(a) in\naccordance with the 1968 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section IX is, in\neffect, required by 192.229(c) to re-qualify after 6 months in accordance with API 1104\nonly, not Section IX?\n2. If the interpretation in Question 1 is correct, can a welder, after 6 months, initially qualify\nagain in accordance with Section IX?\n3. Is a welder qualified in accordance with 192.227(a) automatically qualified for a year in\naccordance with 192.227(c) for pipe operating at less than 20% SMYS?\n4. Is it a correct interpretation that 192.125(c) is limiting to 100 psi only the ASTM B 88\ntype \"L\" copper referred to in 192.125(b), and that copper with a greater wall thickness is\nnot restricted to 100 psi?\nSincerely,\nJohn Searcy, Engineer\nEngineering Division\ndal\\192\\227\\76-01-28\n3","truncated":false,"body_characters":3333}