{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-80-007","title":"Freeman, Freeman & Smiley — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1980-03-12","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-80-007 response to Freeman, Freeman & Smiley concerning 192.317, 195.200, 195.210.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-80-007.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-80-007.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-80-007","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1980/PI80007.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nMr. Bruce M. Smiley\nLaw Offices\nFreeman, Freeman & Smiley\nA Professional Corporation\nCentury Park Center, Suite 950\n9911 West Pico Boulevard\nLos Angeles, California 90035\nDear Mr. Smiley:\nThis letter is written in response to your letter of July 19, 1979, and also telephone conversation\nof July 17 and 18, 1979 requesting our confirmation of an oral interpretation of 49 CFR 195.200.\nWe regret the long delay in responding.\nThe enclosed pipeline safety regulatory interpretation provides the information you requested.\nSincerely,\n/signed/\nCesar De Leon\nAssociate Director for\nPipeline Safety Regulation\nMaterials Transportation Bureau\nEnclosure\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\195\\210\\80-03-12\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nNo. 80-5\nDate: Mar 12, 1980\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nRESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION\nMATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU\n_________________________________________________________________________\nPIPELINE SAFETY REGULATORY INTERPRETATION\n_________________________________________________________________________\nNote: A pipeline safety regulatory interpretation applies a\nparticular rule to a particular set of facts and\ncircumstances, and, as such, may be relied upon\nonly by those persons to whom the interpretation is\nspecifically addressed.\nSECTION: Section 192.327, 195.248, and 195.200\nSubject: Development near pipelines\nFACTS: A person wishes to purchase property in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma. Once\npurchased, this person intends to construct improvements on the property which\nwill fall within the \"Class 3 location\" definition of 49 CFR 192.5(d).\nThis property is encumbered by two independent easements in favor of Continental\nPipe Line Company and Oklahoma Natural Gas Company, respectively. Each\neasement contains pipelines which may be carrying either gases or liquids.\nAll pipelines are assumed in compliance with the Department's pipeline safety\nregulations applicable to undeveloped property.\nQuestion: Does Subpart D of Part 195 apply to a situation involving only grading\nand improving the property, adding additional ground cover, and erecting building\nimprovements? Specifically, do these activities fall within the meaning of\n\"otherwise changing existing pipeline systems\" under §195.200?\nInterpretation: As stated in §195.200, Subpart D applies to construction of new\nsteel pipeline systems and to relocating, replacing, or otherwise changing existing\nsteel pipeline systems.\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\195\\210\\80-03-12\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nNone of the activities mentioned would provide a reason to apply the construction\nrequirements of Subpart D according to the provisions of §195.200. Each of the\nstated criteria for applying Subpart D involves either new construction or some\nphysical alteration to an existing pipeline, and the activities planned would not\nphysically alter the existing pipelines. Although the planned grading could\nphysically alter the condition of the pipelines' right-of-way, this would not have the\neffect of \"otherwise changing\" the pipelines since the terms \"pipeline\" and \"pipeline\nsystem\" are defined in terms of \"physical facilities,\" a term which does not include\nrights-of-way or land used by a pipeline.\nQuestion: Do the cover requirements of §192.327 and §195.248 apply to the\npipelines?\nInterpretation: In accordance with §192.13 for gas pipelines and §195.200 for\nliquid pipelines, the cover requirements apply to pipelines at the time of\nconstruction or when a pipeline is subsequently replaced, relocated, or otherwise\nchanged.\nCesar De Leon\nAssociate Director for\nPipeline Safety Regulation\nMaterials Transportation Bureau\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\195\\210\\80-03-12\n3\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nMr. Cesar DeLeon\nDepartment of Transportation\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\n2100 Second Street, S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nRe: Handy Dan Home Improvement Centers, Inc.\nDepartment of Transportation regulations prescribed under Part 195-\nTransportation of Liquids by Pipeline, Title 49-Transportation, Code of Federal\nRegulations\nDear Mr. DeLeon:\nPursuant to the telephone conversations with our office of July 17, and July 18, 1979, I\nam writing this letter to request a written confirmation of the interpretive decision you rendered to\nus.\nAs we discussed, the facts are as follows:\nA. Our client is presently in an escrow to purchase property in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma.\nOnce purchased, our client intends to construct improvements on the property which will fall\nwithin the \"class 3 location\" definitions of Title 49, Section 192.5(d).\nB. The property is encumbered by two independent easements in favor of Continental\nPipe Line Company and Oklahoma Natural Gas Company, respectively. Each easement contains\npipelines which may be carrying either gases or liquids.\nC. All pipelines, to the best of our knowledge, are presently in compliance with\nDepartment of Transportation Regulations applicable to undeveloped property.\nOur concern arises in connection with our desire to develop the property, and the specific\nrequirements that the pipeline companies may impose upon us in their desire to fully comply with\nthe pipeline regulations. In that regard, this letter is a request for an interpretation as to the\napplicability of Subpart D-Construction, Part 195-Transportation of Liquids by Pipeline, Title 49-\nTransportation, Code of Federal Regulations.\nThe pertinent language of Section 195.200 defining the Scope of Subpart D is as follows:\n\"This subpart prescribes minimum requirements for constructing new pipeline\nsystems with steel pipe, and for relocating, replacing, or otherwise changing existing\npipeline systems that are constructed with steel pipe. However, this subpart does not\napply to the movement of pipe covered by Section 195.424.\"\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\195\\210\\80-03-12\n4\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nAs we interpret the regulations, Subpart D does not apply to this situation where we will\nonly be grading and improving the property, adding additional ground cover, and erecting building\nimprovements. It is clear that we are not \"relocating or replacing\" the pipeline, but I question the\nverbiage in Section 195.200 that states: \"or otherwise changing existing pipeline systems.\"\nSpecifically, what type of activity does the Department of Transportation consider to fall within\nthe realm of \"otherwise changing?\"\nPursuant to the telephone conversations with our office, you informed us that it was your\nopinion that past interpretive decisions had stated that adding additional ground cover, changing\nlandscaping, or erecting surface structures and related improvements were not considered\nactivities which \"change the existing pipeline system.\"\nYour statement to us was that : \"there is no reverse application of Title 49, Section\n195.200 et. seq.\" We concurred that Subpart D is not applicable to our fact situation, and that the\nonly applicable regulations pertaining to cover requirements would be Section 192.327, and\n195.248. The purpose of this letter is to request your written confirmation of this interpretation.\nYou informed us that it usually takes three weeks for your office to render an interpretative\ndecision, but that we could speed up the process by being as specific in our question as is\npossible. I believe we have done so. Accordingly, I hope that you can now confirm the opinion\nthat you gave to us over the telephone.\nYour anticipated response is greatly appreciated. If you should have an questions, please\ndo not hesitate to call.\nVery truly yours,\nFREEMAN, FREEMAN & SMILEY\nA Professional Corporation\nBruce M. Smiley\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\195\\210\\80-03-12\n5","truncated":false,"body_characters":7541}