{"operation":"document","citation":"0900006480e84e4e","title":"U.S. DOT/RSPA - Environmental Assessment - Standards for Direct Assessment of Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines","source_type":"rulemaking","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"current","official":true,"published_on":null,"effective_on":null,"summary":"DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION Docket NO. RSPA-04-16855 .- RIN 2137-AD97 Environmental Assessment Standards for Direct Assessment of Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines I. Description of the Action This environmental assessment concerns regulations that the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) is proposing that would... 6 Institute, the Gas Technology Institute, the Western States Land Commissioners, the National Governors Association, the National League of Cities, the National Council of State Legislators, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Public Interest Reform Group, and the Working Group on Communities Right-To-Know. Additional...","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/regulations-gov-attachment-0900006480e84e4e.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/regulations-gov-attachment-0900006480e84e4e.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/regulations-gov-attachment-0900006480e84e4e","source_url":"https://downloads.regulations.gov/PHMSA-RSPA-2004-16855-0002/attachment_1.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nRESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION\nDocket NO. RSPA-04-16855 .-\nRIN 2137-AD97\nEnvironmental Assessment\nStandards for Direct Assessment of Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines\nI. Description of the Action\nThis environmental assessment concerns regulations that the Research and Special Programs\nAdministration (RSPA) is proposing that would require pipeline operators to meet certain\nstandards when they use direct assessment. In the pipeline industry, “direct assessment” is a\nprocess of data gathering, inspection, examination, and evaluation that is used to determine\nf\nexternal corrosion, internal corrosion, or stress-corrosion cracking is adversely affecting the\nphysical integrity of ferrous pipelines. Although the standards being proposed are already in\neffect under 49 CFR Part 192 for gas transmission lines in high-consequence areas, Congress has\ndirected DOT to prescribe direct assessment standards for other gas and hazardous liquid\npipelines.\nII. Need for the Action\nMany operators of gas and hazardous liquid pipelines do more to assure the integrity of their\nsystems than RSPA’s safety regulations in 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195 require. For example,\n$ 5 192.465 and 195.573 require operators to use electrical tests to identify places where buried\npipe may not be protected adequately from external corrosion. But, in addition to electrical tests,\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n2\nmany operators have historically used internal inspection devices or hydrostatic testing to find\nexternal corrosion. They have also used these methods to look for other pipeline defects.\nRSPA has long recognized the safety and environmental advantages of these additional\ninspection and test methods. In recent years, it became apparent that they are particularly\nbeneficial when used as part of a comprehensive risk-based program to assure system integrity.\nSo, in 2000, RSPA issued regulations requiring hazardous liquid and carbon dioxide pipeline\noperators to conduct integrity management programs using internal inspection, pressure testing,\nor other equally effective assessment means.\nCongress also saw the need for operators to do more to assure the integrity of their pipelines. In\nthe Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002, Congress directed DOT to issue regulations on\nmanaging gas pipeline integrity in high-density population areas with a program involving\ninternal inspection, pressure testing, and direct assessment. In the same legislation, Congress\nalso directed DOT to issue regulations prescribing standards for inspecting pipeline facilities by\ndirect assessment.\nResponding to the first congressional directive, RSPA issued regulations that require operators to\nfollow detailed prograins for managing the integrity of gas transmission lines in high-\nconsequence areas. The regulations include standards for assessing the integrity of pipelines by\ndirect assessment. Now RSPA is addressing the second directive by proposing to require that\noperators meet these same standards if they use direct assessment on regulated pipelines other\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n3\nthan gas transmission lines in high-consequence areas.\n111. Alternatives\nRSPA considered two alternatives to respond to Congress’ second directive. First is the status\nquo alternative: no additional regulations are needed because RSPA has already issued\nregulations that prescribe standards for the use of direct assessment. This alternative was\nrejected, however, because the existing regulations are limited to gas transmission lines in high-\nconsequence areas. They do not reach all pipelines that fall under the second directive. Also\nbecause the regulations affect only a small fraction of regulated pipelines, it is doubtful operators\nwould voluntarily meet the standards when using direct assessment on other pipelines. Operators\nof hazardous liquid pipelines are particularly unlikely to voluntarily meet the standards, because\nthey normally follow only those regulations that apply to hazardous liquid pipelines.\nThe second alternative is to apply the existing direct assessment standards to regulated pipelines\nbesides gas transmission lines in high-consequence areas. RSPA chose this alternative because\nthe existing standards are not inherently limited to gas transmission lines in high-consequence\nareas. Although the existing standard for direct assessment of internal corrosion does not apply\nto hazardous liquid pipelines, it is not being proposed for these pipelines. A further reason for\nchoosing the second alternative is that the existing standards have already undergone public\nnotice and comment in the gas transmission integrity management proceeding, and they were\ngenerally well received by gas transmission operators and other coninienters. Finally, the\nexisting standards depend heavily on consensus standards published by NACE International and\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n4\nthe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), two organizations whose standards are\nwidely used and highly regarded in the pipeline industry.\nIV. The Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences of the Action\nThe proposed regulations concern assessing the threat of corrosion on regulated onshore gas and\nhazardous liquid pipelines, except gas transmission lines in high-consequence areas. Thus the\naffected environment is the land area of the United States that could be affected by corrosion-\ncaused leaks or ruptures in these pipelines.\nThe proposed regulations would apply only to pipeline operators who voluntary decide to use\ndirect assessment to evaluate the effects of corrosion on their pipelines. If they do use direct\nassessment, the proposed regulations would require that they meet standards currently applicable\nto conducting direct assessment on gas transmission lines in high-consequence areas. However,\nthe iiitenial corrosion standard would not apply to hazardous liquid pipelines. To meet the direct\nassessment standards, operators would have to perform data collection, indirect inspection, direct\nexamination, and evaluation under appropriate procedures, plans, and criteria .\nConducting direct examinations of buried pipelines involves excavating predetermined locations\nalong rights-of-way to identify and correct likely corrosion defects. This type of localized ground\ndisturbance typically does not involve damage to vegetation or the environment beyond the\nimmediate vicinity of the pipeline. These disturbances would have far less impact than the\npotential consequences of a pipeline accident that could occur if a corrosion defect went\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\n5\nuncorrected. In RSPA’s experience, the benefits of direct examinations in reducing the\nlikelihood of corrosion-caused accidents would offset the minor adverse impacts of localized\nground disturbances.\nA significant advantage of using direct assessment is that it can not only locate existing corrosion\ndefects but also places where defects could develop in the future. This advantage together with\nincreased confidence in assessments done under the proposed standards may persuade operators\nto use direct assessment more frequently. If so, corrosion-caused accidents should become less\nlikely, as more conditions that could develop into leaks or ruptures are detected and corrected.\nAny reduction in the likelihood of pipeline accidents means greater protection of people and the\nenvironment .\nRSPA believes that on balance the proposed regulations may positively affect the environment\nbecause the regulations may encourage operators to more accurately determine the integrity of\ntheir pipelines. However, this impact is unlikely to be significant because use of direct\nassessment is voluntary under the proposed regulations.\nV. List of Contacts\nThe direct assessment standards were developed during the proceeding on integrity management\nof gas transmission lines in high-consequence areas. RSPA interacted and consulted\nwith several organizations in that proceeding. These organizations included the Interstate\nNatural Gas Association of America, the American Gas Association, the Battelle Memorial\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>\n\n6\nInstitute, the Gas Technology Institute, the Western States Land Commissioners, the National\nGovernors Association, the National League of Cities, the National Council of State Legislators,\nthe Environmental Defense Fund, the Public Interest Reform Group, and the Working Group on\nCommunities Right-To-Know. Additional contacts may result from participation by interested\npersons in the present rulemaking proceeding.\nVI. Conclusion\nBased on the above considerations, RSPA has determined that there are no significant\nenvironmental impacts associated with this action.","truncated":false,"body_characters":8676}