{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-94-024","title":"Railroad Commission of Texas — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1994-06-07","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-94-024 response to Railroad Commission of Texas concerning 192.503.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-94-024.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-94-024.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-94-024","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1994/PI94024.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nMs. Mary L. McDaniel, P.E.\nManager, Pipeline Safety\nRailroad Commission of Texas\nP.O. Box 12967\nAustin, TX 78711-2967\nDear Ms. McDaniel:\nYour letter of October 4, 1993, requests our assistance in responding to two questions.\nAccordingly, we are providing the following information:\nQuestion #1 What insight can RSPA provide on “ small entities” as the term is used in the\nparagraph titled “ Regulatory Flexibility Act” in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking-Drug and\nAlcohol Testing Programs-published December 15, 1992, (57 FR 59714)?\nAnswer #1 The term “ small entity” is defined in 601 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.\n§ 601). The term “ small business” , a subset of “ small entity” is defined in 15 U.S.C. 632. In\naddition to these provisions, regulations at 13 C.F.R. § 121.601 provided detailed standards to\nassist in determining whether a business is a “ small business.” With respect to the pipeline\nindustry, size standards are discussed in 13 C.F.R. § 121.601, Division E, Major Groups 46 and\n49, which were recently amended (see 59 FR 16529; April 7, 1994). I have enclosed copies of\nthe relevant statutory provisions and regulations.\nQuestion #2 “ Our second question relates to the hydrostatic testing of replacement pipe under\n§ 192.719(a). In a repair situation where several joints of pipe are welded together, does the\nwelded piece have to be hydrostatically tested as a unit? Each joint is pre-tested and the welds are\n100% non-destructively tested.”\nAnswer #2 Section 192.719(a) is intended for testing of repairs of transmission pipelines, where\nthe pipe is required to be tested as a new line. The test requirements in Subpart J are applicable to\na new segment of pipeline, or the return to service of a segment of pipeline that has been\nrelocated or replaced.\nIn accordance with § 192.503(a) in Subpart J, the entire replaced segment must be tested in\naccordance with Subpart J and § 192.619, except the tie-in joints that are excepted under §\n192.503(d). It should be noted that the joints connecting the several pipe lengths are not tie-in\njoints. However, if, in accordance with § 192.505(e), it is not practical to conduct a post\ninstallation test, a preinstallation strength test must be conducted on each pipe length or the\nsegment by maintaining the pressure at or above the test pressure for at least 4 hours.\ndal/192.503\n94-06-07\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nI am sorry for the delay in replying to you. Please let me know if you need further information on\neither of the above questions.\nSincerely,\nCesar De Leon\nDirector, Regulatory Programs\nOffice of Pipeline Safety\nEnclosures\ncc:\ndal/192.503\n94-06-07","truncated":false,"body_characters":2646}