{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-92-006","title":"Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1992-02-04","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-92-006 response to Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. concerning 192.707.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-92-006.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-92-006.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-92-006","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1992/PI92006.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nMr. Tony J. Finneman\nMontana-Dakota Utilities Co.\n400 North Fourth Street\nBismarck, ND 58501\nDear Mr. Finneman:\nI am responding to your letter of September 16, 1991, and December 13, 1991, regarding the line\nmarking requirement for gas pipelines in §192.707 (d) (1). You asked if Class 3 locations and\nClass 4 locations may be considered \"heavily developed urban areas\" under §192.707 (d) (1).\nIn Part 192 the terms \"Class 3 location,\" \"Class 4 location,\" and \"heavily developed urban areas\"\nare categorizations of population density. Although \"Class 3 location\" and \"Class 4 location\" are\ndefined in §192.5, Part 192 does not define \"heavily developed urban areas.\"\nAll Class 4 locations - places where building four or more stories in height are prevalent - are\nincluded in the term \"heavily developed urban areas.\" Buildings of four or more stories normally\nare prevalent only in such areas.\nThe definition of \"Class 3 location\" does not necessarily indicate that the location is in a heavily\ndeveloped urban area. Yet the definition could encompass such areas, depending on the\ncircumstances. We consider the surroundings of a Class 3 location to decide if all or part of it is a\nheavily developed urban area for purposes of §192.707 (d) (1).\nI am sorry we were not able to answer your September letter sooner. Please call me if you would\nlike to discuss this topic further.\nSincerely,\nCesar De Leon\nDirector, Office Pipeline\nSafety Regulatory Programs\nDB\nC:\\WP51\\INTERPRT\\192\\707\\92-02-04\n1","truncated":false,"body_characters":1509}