U.S. DOT/RSPA - Memorandum re: Record of Vote

Page 1p$.A- u r i % U.S. Department , i r p / + +?-b(33- 7- 400 Seventh St., S.W. of Transportation Research amd NOV 7 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PLPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE (THLPSSC) MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE (TPSSC) Stacey L. Gerard, Asso for Pipeline Safety Request for Vote by Letter Ballot on the Proposed Rulemaking: Pipeline Safety: Producer-Operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters (67 FR 16355:l At the THLPSSC and TPSSC committee meeting held on February 6-7,2001, the committees were briefed on the proposals that appear in the attached notice, “Pipeline Safety: Producer-Operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters.” To publish a final rule, the Department of Transportation is required to obtain a peer review from members of the technical advisory committees and to obtain a vote on the proposed amendments. Therefore, please review the attached Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPFM) and briefing paper dated February 2001 and cast your vote on these amendments by letter ballot (attached). Please forward completed ballots to Cheryl Whetsel, Advisory Committee Coordinator by November 29, 2002. If you have any questions concerning the content of the NPRM, please contact L.E. Herrick, at (202) 366-5523 or Richard Huriaux, (202) 366-4565. Attachments#

Page 2RSPA Fact Sheet Updated: Feb 2001 - Producer Operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Advisory Committee Action: 1. Information This proposed rule would implement a provision of the December 10, 1996, Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) regarding Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) pipelines. It would addre js producer operated natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines that cross into State waters without first connecting to a transporting operator’s facility on the OCS. In addition, it would propose procedures by which producer and transporting operators could petition for approval to operate under either RSPA or MMS regulations governing pipeline design, construction, operation, and maintenance. The MOU placed, to the greatest extent practicable, OCS production pipelines under DO1 responsibility and OCS transportation pipelines under DOT responsibility. Thus, RSPA h 1s primary regulatory responsibility for transporter operated pipelines and associated pumpin 5 or compressor facilities on the OCS, while MMS has primary regulatory responsibility for producer operated facilities and pipelines. Producing operators are companies that are engaged in the extraction and processing of hydrocarbons on the OCS. Transporting operators are companies that are engaged in the transportation of those hydrocarbons from the OCS. There are about 150 operators of producer pipelines and about 75 operators of transportation pipelines on the OCS. The December 10, 1996, MOU was published in a jc int MMS-RSPA Federal Register Notice (February 14, 1997; 62 FR 7037-7039). For producer operated pipeline facilities that cross into State waters without first connecti:ig to a transporting operator’s facility on the OCS, we propose that pipeline segments located upstream (generally seaward) of the last valve on the last production facility (excluding pipeline risers and associated safety equipment) be exempted from 49 CFR Parts 190- 199. RSPA would continue to inspect all upstream safety equipment (including valves, over- pressure protection devices, cathodic protection equipment, and pigging devices that serve to protect the integrity of the RSPA regulated pipeline segments.#

Page 3Federal Communications Commission. William E Caton. Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. 024304 Filed 4 4 2 ; 8 4 5 am] BILLING CODE 671W?-f DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Research and Special Programs Administration 49 CFR Parts 191,192. and I95 [Docket Number RSPA-90-61321 RIN 2137-AO42 Pipeline Safety: Producer-Operated Outer Continental Shew Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines That cross Directly into State Waters AGENCY. Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA). DOT. AC710K Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This document proposes to implement a provision of the December 10,1996, Memorandum of Understanding [MOU) between the Bepartmerit of the Interior (Dol) and -the Department of Trans ortation (DOT) regarding safety reguPations of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines. This rule addresses producer-operated natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines that crass into State waters without first connecting to a transporting operator’s facility on the OCS. This proposed rule would also address the procedures by which producer operators could petition for approval to operate under RSPA regulations governing pipeline design, construction, operation. and maintenance. DATES Comments on the subject of this proposed rule must be received on or before June 4.2002. ADDRESSES Comments should identify t h e docket number of this proposed rule, SPA-99-6132. and be mailed to t h e Dockets Facility. US. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Plaza 401, Washington. DC 20590- 0001. You should submit the original and one copy. Anyone who wants confirmation of receipt of their comments must include a stamped, self- addressed postcard. The Dockets facility is open from 1O:OO a.m. to 5:OO p m . . Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays. Alternatively. you may submit written comments to the docket electronically. To do so, log on to the Internet Web address http:// dms.dot.gov and click on “Help” for instructions on electronic filing of comments. All written comments should identify the docket and notice Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 66 /Friday, April 5, 2002 I Proposed Rules 16355 - numbers which appear in the heading of this notice. FOR FURTHW INFORMATION CONTACK YOU may contact L.E. Herrick by telephone at (202) 366-5523, by fax at (202) 366 4566, by mail at U.S. Department of Transportation, RSPA. DPS-IO, room 7128.400 Seventh Street, SW.. Washington, DC 20590, or via e-mail to le.herrick-@rspo. dot.gov regarding the subject matter of this notice. For copies of this notice or other material that is referenced herein you may contact the Dockets Facility by telephone at (202) 366-5046 2r at the addresses listed above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIOM This rule is complementary to the RSPA Direct Final Rule (DFR) that addressed OCS natural gas or hazardous liquid pipeline facilities located upstream of the points at which operating responsibility for the pipeline facility transfers from a producing operator to a transporting operator [November 19.1997; 62 FR 61692 and March 16,1998; 63 FR 12659) and to the DO1 Minerals Management Service (MMS) rule. “Producer Operated Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters.” which was published in the Federal Re&er on July 2 7 , 2000 (65 FR 46092). B a c k p u n d In May 1996, MMS and RSPA met with a joint industry workgroup, which was led by the American Petroleum Institute. The workgroup proposed that the agencies rely upon individual operators of natural gas and hazardous liquid production and transportation pipeline facilities to identify the boundaries of their respective facilities. The MMS and RSPA agreed with the industry proposal and entered into an interagency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on December 10, 1996. The MOU was published in a joint MMS-RSPA Federal Register Notice (Februar 14.1997; 62 FR 7037-7039). The &U placed, to the greatest practical extent, OCS production pipetines under DO1 responsibility and OCS transportation pipelines under DOT responsibility. Therefore, RSPA has primary regulatory responsibility for transporter-operated pipelines and associated pumping or compressor facilities on the OCS. while MMS has primary regulatory responsibility for producer-operated facilities and pipelines. Producing operators are companies which are engaged in the extraction and processing of hydrocarbons on the OCS. Transporting operators are companies which are engaged in the transportation of those hydrocarbons born the OCS. There are approximately 150 operators of producer pipelines and 75 opera ors of transportation pipelines on the CCS. The MOU established a regula? ory boundary on the OCS at the point where operating responsibility for the pipeline transfers from a producing operalor to a transporting operator. The MOU did not address the producer-operated p pelines that cross the FederallState boundary without a transfer on the OCS. H3wever. the MOU provided the agencies tvith the flexibility to address situations tliat do not correspond to the general delinition of the regulatory boundary. The purpose of this proposed iule is to address regulatory questions regarding producer-operated pip sline facilities that cross the FederaVState boundary without first connectir g t o a transporting operator’s facility on the OCS and to establish a procedurtr whereby OCS producing operators may petition to have their pipelines regulated by RSPA. The rule would amend 49 CFRparts 191.I(b)(l). 192.lb)(l) and 195.1(b)(5]. When we published the DFX t a implement the December 1996 hfOU on November 19.1997 (62 FR 6169:!). we received comments from Chevron U.S.A. Production Company anc Chevron Pipe Line Company in Nhich they observed that the proposed regulation did not appear to allow Ocs producer-operated pipelines to I emain under DOT regulatory authority The commenters requested that provision be made to allow producers to continue to operate under DOT regulations if approval is obtained from DOI. This arose because the regulafory boundaries in the MOU and the DFR were described in terms of spec Fic points on OCS pipelines where operating responsibility transfeIs from a producing operator to a connecting transporting operator. The prod x e r - operated pipelines that cross t h t : FederaVState boundary into State waters without first connecting to a transporter-operated facility we -e not affected. Nor were the producer lines that flow from State waters to production platforms located 011 the OCS. Regardless of the direction of flow,producer pipelines that cross tk e Federal/State boundary are always subject to RSPA regulation on tie portions of the lines located in State waters. However, it does not mpike operational sense to have a pipisline segment crossing the FederallS ate boundary subject to MMS regulations on the OCS side of the boundary a i d RSPA regulations on the State side of the boundary. W e believe that a rq,ulatory#

Page 416356 Federal Register/ Vol. 67, No. 66lFriday; April 5, 2002 /Proposed Rules - boundary point is better defined in terms of a specific point that isolates one segment of a pipeline from another. By contrast, the FederallState geographic boundary does not allow the isolation of facilities on each side of the boundary. Therefore, for producer-operated pipeline facilities that cross into State waters without first connecting to a transporting operator's facility on the OCS, we propose that pipeline segments located upstream (generally seaward) of the last valve on the last production facility (excluding pipeline risers and associated safety equipment) be exempted from compliance with 4 9 CFX parts 19&199. Under this arrangement, producer- operated pipeline facilities upstream (generally seaward) of the last valve on the last production facility on the OCS would be regulated under MMS regulations. RSPA would continue to inspect all upstream safety equipment (including valves, over-pressure protection devices, cathodic protection equipment. and pigging devices) that serve to protect the integrity of the RSPA-regulated pipeline segments. This arrangement is consistent with the general intent of the MOU. However, producer-operators whose lines do not transfer operating responsibility on the OCS may petition RSPA for a different regulatory boundary. An important principle of the industry agreement leading to tbe MOU is to allow the operators to agree to the regulatory boundaries on their facilities. Therefore, producer pipeline operators may petition RSPA's Office of Pipeline Safety under 49 CFR 190.9 for approval to operate under RSPA regulations governing pipeline design, construction, operation, and maintenance. In considering such petitions, the RSPA Administrator, or designee, will consult with the MMS and the affected parties. This proposed rule would affect about 215 producer-operated pipelines that are being regulated according to a now- superseded 1976 MOU between DO1 and DOT. By exempting the producer- operated pipelines from RSPA regulation, this rule would reduce the overlapping regulations in accordance with the MOU of December 10.1996. The rulemaking would have minimal economic impact on any of the affected operators. Regulatory Analyses and Notices A. E.O. 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies ond Procedures DOT does not consider this action to be a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12666 (58 FR 51735; October 4.1993). Therefore, it was not forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget. This proposed rule is not significant under DOT'S regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26. 1979). A regulatory evaluation of this proposal was prepared and placed in the docket of this action. Benefits Without the proposed rule, the pipeline operations of a large number of producers with pipelines crossing directly into State waters could remain subject to overlapping regulations for design, construction, operation, and maintenance. This includes about 35 producers in Gulf of Mexico OCS waters and 10 producers operating in Califomia OCS waters. This would be contrary to the intent of the American Petroleum lnstitute and industry agreement and the MOU to regulate producer-operated pipelines under DO1 and transporter- operated pipelines under DOT. By imp ementing the proposed rule. RSPA will bring these pipelines under the provisions of the 1996 MOU. This should serve to minimize confusion among operators concerning which regulations they are expected to follow. We estimate that each OCS producer operator spends on average one-half person year annually per OCS pipeline to comply with RSPA regulations. Assuming that a loaded wage For a person year in the pipeline industry is $50,000, each company could realize a savings of $25,000 annually ($50,000 x 0.5 person-years = $25,000). The annual savings to the entire industry could be as high as $1.125.000 ($25.000 x 45 operators = S1.125.000). costs The administrative costs of the proposed rule are minimal. Papemork costs would arise only in cases when a producer pipeline operator decided to request that its pipeline continue to be regulated as a RSPA facility. We estimate that less than 10 producer pipeline operators will request ko remain under RSPA regulation. We estimate that the time for developing each request and submitting it to MMS and RSPA will be about 40 hours. Based on 10 requests at 40 hours each, the total one-time burden of requesting to remain under RSPA regulation will be less than 400 hours. Based on $35 per hour, we estimate that the total administrative cost to respondents is less than $14,000 ($1,400 per request) during the first year that the rule is implemented. In the first year, nearly all producer pipeline operators would have decided whether to automatically convert to M M S regulation or ap ?ly to remain under RSPA regulation. 7 V e anticipate that in following yearr , not more than two operators a year vrould submit a request to change their regulatory status at a total cost 0. %2,8Qo. However, for most follolring years it is highly unlikely that ally request would be made as a result of the pro osedrule. &e proposed rule does not h;,ve a significant economic effect (less than $100 million]: therefore. RSPA tloes not consider it to be a major rule. We d o not expect there to be any increases in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local governments, agencies. or geographic regions to result from implemer ting the proposed rule. Any indirect effc cts on costs or prices are anticipated ttr be negligible. This proposed rule will not create a serious inconsistency or othemise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency: materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants, user fees, or loan programs; or raise novel legal c r policy issues. The proposed rule will not have any effect on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of U.S. based enlerprises to compete with foreign based enterprises in other markets bc cause the economic effects are minor. Tl~erefore. a Regulatory Impact Analysis is not required under E.O. 12866. B. Federalism Assessment The proposed rule would ni)t have substantial direct effects on States, on the relationship between the I'ederal Government and the States, 01' on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the va .io,, levels of rrovemment. Therefere. in accordan& with Executive O1.der 12612 (October 30. 1987: 52 FR 4161b5). we have determined that this nolice does not have sufficient Federalisr I implications to warrant prepmtion of a Federalism Assessment. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Under the Regulatory Flex bility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 el seq.) RSPA must consider whether a rulemaking would have a significant impact on a substantial number of small rntities. MMS recently conducted ,tn analysisof 150 operators on the Gulf of Mexico OCS. For publicly-traded operators, numbers of employees and i nnual sales are readily available on the Internet. MMS was not able to get infirmation on all operators on the OCS. LJ: mg the critermn that a small company IS one#

Page 5Federal Register/ Vol. 67, No. 66 /Friday, April 5, 2002 /Proposed Rules 16357 = Lhat employs less than 500 employees, regulation. Pipeline Companies are This certification is subject to 60 operators are medium-to-large-size considered “small” if they have fewer modification as a result of a review of of &e remaining operators, 36 than 1.500 employees, but both of these the comments received in response to are small, based on available data. and operators would be considered ”large” this proposal. 44 others were presumed to be small under the 1~500-emPloYee criterion. D, ~~~~~~j~~ Order 13084 because no information about them was Natural gas and hazardous liquid available on &e Internet. In sum. 80 production and ttanspofiation This proposed rule has been airalyzed operators on &e Gulf of Mexico OCS companies are classified under NAICS in accordance with the principle; and may be considered to be small. Codes by the Census Bureau. The Small criteria contained in Executive Crder fie above breakdown describes the Business Administration further 13084 (“Consultation and Coord nation cxs sector of the natural gas and classifies “small businesses” in the with Indian Tribal Governments ’). hazardous liquid industry as a whole various offshore Sectors as follows: (11 Because this proposed rule effec :s the and provides the wider context in Oil and gas producers that have fewer Federally managed OCS and does not which to examine the actual community than 500 employees; (2) liquid pipeline affect the communities of the Inclian that would be affected by the proposed companies than have fewer than 2,500 tribal governments and nor impcise any I-llle. employees: (3) natural gas pipeline . direct compliance costs, the funiiing Ofthe 150 production operators in the companies that have gross annual and consultation requirements a f Gulf of Mexico, only 35 would be receipts of 325 million or less; and (41 Executive Order 13084 do not allply. directly affected by the proposed Nh. offshore oil and gas field exploration Of these 35 operators. 11 are considered service or production service companies E. Executive O&f 13132 to be “small.” There are about ten that have gross annual receipts of $5 This proposed rule has been analyzed producer pipeline operators on the million or less. There are many in accordance with the principiis and Pacific OCS that may be affected by the companies on the OCS that are “Small uiteria contained in Executive fhder proposed rule, and four of these are businesses” by these definitions. 13132 [“Federalism”). This prolmsed considered to be small. Of the small However* the rule does not propose any regut ition operators to be affected by the proposed for conducting offshore oil and gas that: rule. almost all are represented by the exphation and development activities [1) H~~ substantial direct effe ..ts on North American Lndustry Classification is very complex and costly. and most the States, the relationship betv,een the System (NAICS) code 211111. which entities that engage in offshore activities national and the States, oc represents crude petroleum and natural have financial resources the distribution of power and gas producers. A pi eline company (non-producer) is disproportionate to their numbers of employees and well beyond what would responsibilities among the vari,,us ofgovernment: a .‘smayl entity” if it is a liquid pipeline normally be considered “small ny with fewer than 1.500 business.” These entities customarily 1’) Imposes K:ryees, or a natural gas pipeline conduct their operations by contracting governments; costs or On States and local company with gross annual receipts of with offshore drilling or service $25 million or less. There are about 18 companies. and therefore tend to have entities operating on the OCS that can few employees in relation to their be interpreted as “small independent financial resources. pipeline companies.” These small There are up to 150 designated pipeline companies provide operators of leases and 75 operators of transportation services for several non- major oil or gas producers with which transmission ipelines on the OCS (both large and sma P 1 operators), and the they have an “arms-length“ but economic impacts on the oil and gas symbiotic business relationship. These production and transmission companies companies are represented primarily by directly affected would be minor. All NAICS codes 486210 [crude petroleum costs imposed by the rule would be pipelines) and 486210 (natural gas small compared to the normal operating transmission pipelines). and maintenance expenses experienced The larger operators to be affected by by offshore pipeline operators, Direct the rule mostly fall into either NAICS costs to industry for the entire proposed Code 211111 (crude petroleum and rule total less than 514.000 For the first natural gas producers), or NAICS Code year. This rule would not impose any 324110, which represents petroleum new restrictions on small pipeline refining. Companies operating on the service companies or manufacturers, nor OCS and that fall into NAICS Code will it cause their business practices to 324110 tend to be the very large change. integrated natural gas and hazardous We conclude that the proposed rule liquid com anies. would not have a significant economic Two of t{e larger operators in the Gulf impact on a substantial number of small of Mexico that have production entities. Therefore, I certify, pursuant to pipelines are represented under NAKS section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Code 486210 (natural gas transmission). Act (5 U.S.C. 6051, that this proposal and by NAlCS Code 221210 (natural gas will not, if implemented. have a distribution). These classifications mean significant economic impact on a that the operators in question normally substantial number of small entities. operate as pipeline companies, and we However. we are particularly interested anticipate that these two operators may in receiving comments from any small choose to remain under RSPA business operators believing otherwise. (3] state law. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executlve Order 13132 (64 FR 43255; Au p s t IO, 19991 do not apply. F. Unfunded Mandates This proposed N ~ B would not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It would not result in costs of over $100 million or more to either State. local, or tribal governments, i: t the aggregate, or to the private sector. and is the least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives. G. pope,ork Reduction This proposed rule does no1 containinformation collection requiri:ments estimated to effect more than ten respondents per year. H. Notional Environment01 P d i c y Act We have analyzed this acti m for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 ei seq.) and have determined that this pntposed rule would not significantly affec: the quality of the human envirorment. The Environmental Assessment c f this proposal is available for revi:w in the docket.#

Page 616358 Federal Register/Vol. 67, No. 661 Friday, April 5, ZOOZ/Proposed Rules = I. Executive Order 1321 1 lEnergy1 We have reviewed this proposed rule in accordance with Executive Order 13211 regarding the energy of Federal regulations and have determined that this proposed rule does not have any adverse effects on energy supply. distribution, or use. Therefore, no reasonable altematives to this action x e necessary. List of Subjects 49 CFR 291 Gas, Pipeline safety. Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Port 192 Hazardous liquid, Natural gas, Pipeline safety, Pipelines. Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Port 195 Ammonia. Carbon dioxide, Petroleum. Pipeline safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 49 CFRParts 191.192 and 1% is proposed to be amended as follows. operating responsibility transfers from a producing operator to a transporting operator: or 14) Onshore gathering of gas outside of the following areas: (i) An area within the limits of any incorporated or unincorporated city. town, or village. (ii) Any designated residential or commercial area such as a subdivision, business or shopping center, or community development. (61 Any pipeline system that transports only petroleum gas c r petroleum gadair mixtures to-. (i) Fewer than 10 customers, if no portion of the system is located in a public place: or (ii) A single customer, if the iystem is located entirely on the customc r's premises (no matter if a portio11 of the system is located in a public place]. PART 195-[AMENDED] PART 192-[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for Pari 192 would continue to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103.60102, 60104. 60108,60109.60110.60113,60118: and 49 CFR 1.53. 2. Section 192.1 would be amended by revising paragraphs &)(I) through (5) and adding paragraph (b)(6] to read as follows: 1. The authority citation for :'art 195 would continue to read as folk ws: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103,6010::. 60104, 60108.60109.60118: and 49 CFR . .53. 2. Section 195.1 would be ariended by redesignating paragraphs [b1(7). (8) and (9) a s paragraphs (aI[B). [9 and [io), respectively; revising paragraphs (b)(5) and [6); and adding a new par: graph (b)(7] to read as follows: 5 195.1 Applicability. g 192.1 Scope of part. t . . * t t * * C * t (bl (b) * (I) Offshore gathering of gas in State (5) Transportation of hazardDus liquid waters upstream Erom the outlet flange or carbon dioxide in offshore Iiipelines PART lOl--[AMENDED] of each facility where hydrocarbons are in State waters which are ]oca ed 1. The authority citation for part 191 produced or where produced hydrocarbons are first separated, upstream from the outlet flange of each facility where hydrocarbons 0. carbon would continue to read as follows: dehydrated, or otherwise processed. dioxide are produced or when: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5121. 60102.60103. whichever facility is farther produced hydrocarbons or carbon 60104,60108.60117.60118.60124; and 49 downstream: dioxide are first separated, deliydrated, CFR 1.53. (2) Pipelines on the Outer Continental or otherwise processed. whicl ever 2. Section 191.1 would be amended Shelf that are producer-operated and facility is farther downstream by revising paragaph fi) to read as cross into State waters without first (6) Transportation of hazarc ous liquid follows: connecting to a transporting operator's or carbon dioxide in Outer Continental 5 191.1 Scope. facility, upstream [generally seaward) of Shelf pipelines which are loc;,ted 9 f t . t the last valve on the last production upstream of the point at whic 1 facility (excluding pipeline risers and M' * operating responsibility trans 'em from a associated safety equipment). Producing producing operator to a translrorting (11 Offshore gathering of gas in State operators may petition the waters upstream from the outlet flange operator; Administrator, or designee. for approval of each facility where hydrocarbons are (7) Pipelines on the Outer C'ontinentat to operate under RSPA regulations produced or where produced Shelf that are producer-opera ed and governing pipeline design, construction. hydrocarbons are first separated, cross into State waters withotit first operation, and maintenance under 49 dehydrated, or otherwise processed, connecting to a transporting c perator's CFR 190.9; whichever facility is farther facility, upstream (generally E eaward) of (3) Pipelines on the Outer Continental downstream; the last valve on the last production Shelf upstream of the point at which (2) Pipelines on the Outer Continental facility [excluding pipeline risers and operating responsibility transfers from a Shelf that are producer-operated and associated safety equipment) Producing cross into State waters without first producing operator to a transporting operators may petition the connecting to a transporting operator's operator; Administrator or designee foi approval facility, upstream (generally seaward) of (4) Onshore gathering of gas outside of to operate under RSPA regulittions the last valve on the last production the following areas: governing pipeline design, cctnstruction, facility [excluding pipeline risers and (i) An area within the limits of any operation, and maintenance iinder 49 associated safety equipment]. Producing incorporated or unincorporated city, CFR 190.9: operators may petition the town, or village. t t . * * Administrator, or designee, for approval (ii) Any designated residential or to operate under RSPA regulations commercial area such as a subdivision, Issued in Washington. MJ on ldarch 15, governing pipeline design. construction, business or shopping center, or operation, and maintenance under 49 community development. CFR 190.9: (5) Onshore gathering of gas within (3) Pipelines on the Outer Continental inlets of the Gulf of Mexico except as Shelf upstream of the point at which provided in 5 192 612; or 2002. Stacey L. Gerard. Associate Administmlorforhpe h e So/efy. [FR Doc 02-6825 Filed 4-4-02: a 45 4 BlLUHG CODE A33obD-P#

Page 7TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29, 2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1,192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes arc: made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1,192 and 195 are not (or cannJt be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Signature Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 8~~ Alex P. Alvarado (G) Chief, Pipeline Section J Minerals Management Service 1201 Elmwood Park Blvd. New Orleans, LA 70123 alex.al\ alado!ll:lnrl~.c.o\ Membership Category: (G)=Government; (I) Industry; (P) Public (504) 736-2547 David Lopez (G) (703) 603-8707 Fax 736-2408 Dir., Oil Program Center Fax 603-9 1 16 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency /’ 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 lopez.david!Ne~a.fio\ Denise A. Bode (G) Commissioner State of Oklahoma 304 Jim Thorpe Building Oklahoma City, OK 73105 d.hodc!~i~accmail.occ.state.ok .us Linda Guthrie - contact /” Cook Inlet Keeper ois N. Epstein, P.E. (P) Senior Engineer 1026 W. qth Avenue Suite 201 Anchorage, AK 99501 loisi~i~inletE;ee~cr.or!! Denise M. Hamsher (I) Director, Public & Govenment Affairs Enbridge (U.S.) Inc. 1100 Louisiana Street, Suite 3300 Houston, TX 77002 dciiisc hamzhsrih enbi doc-us coni Orville D. Harris (I) Vice President, Asset Management Longhorn Partners Pipeline 3633 Allen Parkway, Suite 220 Houston, TX 770 19 o. d . han ish l\vilhams. coni Mr. Willie D. Jones (I) ogistics and Customer Service Manager Pipe Line Company (405) 521-2267 Fax 521-1409 (907) 276-4244 ext. 119 Fax 276-71 10 (713) 821-2089 Fax 653-6710 (713) 529-1555 Fax 524-3999 (918) 661-1993 Fax 662-2304 Larry Miller (P) ( 7 13) 670-2605 Channel Development Manager Fax 670-2427 Port of Houston Authority 1 1 I East Loop North Houston, TX 77029 lmiller@poha.com Mary F. Morgan (I) Vice President, Customer Service Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. 500 Dallas, Suite 1000 Houston, TX 77002 inarv inorgaii~u,kiiiderinoraaIi.com A u t h Ellen Schelhaus (P) Environmental Specialist 507 Greenblades Court Amold, MD 2 10 12 Home: rschel@i’toad.net / Marilyn G. Showalter (G) Chairwoman Washington Utilities Transportation Commission 1300 S. Evergreen Park Drive, S.W. Olympia, WA 98504 m s l i o w a l t i i r l ~ ~ . u t c . ~ ~ - a . ~ ~ ~ Mary Mendoza - contact Bruce Stein (P) Nature Serve 1101 Wilson Blvd, 15‘h floor Arlington, VA 22093 bskinyhaturzsei ve.oi q (713) 369-9448 Fax 560-4677 (202) 646-5671 Fax 646-5500 (360) 664-1 173 Fax 586-1 150 (703) 908-1 830 Fax 908- 1 9 17 Updated March 5, 2002 1#

Page 9TECHNICAL, HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29, 2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes ar? made (attach additional sheets if nccessq). 3.- The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 12. -17- o Z Date CheryI Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW. Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 10Nov-27-2002 04:39pm From- T - 0 5 5 P 001/001 :-473 TECFINTCAL NAZARDOUS LIQUID PTPELPX SAFETY STANDARDS COMMIT TEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STAIVDARDS COMMlTTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safe@: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Haznrtlous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and retuni this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. % The proposed amendmmts to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and pracricable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (anach addiriond sheets i l necessary). 3.- The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Pam 19 1,192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technicallf feasible, reasonable, cos-effective. and practicable. Signature I >- -_ -- /- Cheryl Whzrsel Research and Special Programs Adminisnsrion U. S, Department of Transparlarim 400 Seventh Strset, Sly, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone 1 (2 02) 3 6 6-443 1 DatC#

Page 11TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and retum this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. J/ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. ~ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are not (or camlt be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. < Signature Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 12TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. / The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 1 95 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes a-e made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1,192 and 195 are not (or car not be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 13TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and retum this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. 2. x. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes a~ e made (attachradditional sheets if necessary). A - 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasibIe, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 14TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMIT::EE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazard )US Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically I feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable" r7-A ' ~ = & // dLzr 9 )' d T e l f ~ a w / @ vOhy y-ti ( 3 The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are not (or cannot I' be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. b,.-c4 r;a I i#

Page 15TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29, 2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. x The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes ire made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 16TO: Cheryl Whetsel FAX NO. 202-3664595 FROM: Marilyn Showalter, Chairwoman Utilities and Transportation Commission Phone: 360-664-1 173 Fax: 360-586-1 150 Number of pages including this cover sheet: 2 COMMENTS: Ballot on Proposed Reulmaking -. -___I_- -#

Page 17TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY S'TAKDARDS COMhTITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Ruleniaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1- x The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, I92 and 195 are technically feasible. reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 1 9 1, 192 and 195 zre technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (artach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Adminisvation U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 71211 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-4431#

Page 18J Membership Category: (G) = Govemment; (I) = Industry; (P) = Public h e n P. Andrews, I11 (I) he,odore C. Lemoff (P) General Mana er Oak Ridge Uti f ities District Senior Gasses Engineer National Fire Protection Association P.O. Box 4189 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-4189 1 Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02269 R. Comstock (I). Compllance Coordinator Mesa, Anzona Mesa, AZ 8521 1 -1466 ox 1466 640 N. Mesa Drive) Rickey L. Cotton (G) Director of Pipeline Safety Mississippi Public Service Commission 550 High Street, Room 1920 Jackson, MS 39201 L. Andrew Drake I Director of Codes, M etallurgical Services and Project Records Duke Ener y.Gas Transmission 5400 West E eimer Court Houston, TX 77056 /Richard E. Fei el (P) Vice President, kngineering Hartford Steam Boiler One State Street - PO Box 5024 Hartford, CT 06 102 Linda J. Kelly (G) Commissioner State of Connecticut De artment of Public Utility Control 10 %ranklm S uare New Britain, ET 06051 J Charles R. Matthews (G) Commissioner Railroad Commission of Texas 1701 North Con ess Austin, TX 78 F 01 J Pro1 ect ManagerIManager L orrosion Steve Nikolakakos , P.E. P) Engineering- Russell Corrosion Consultants, Inc. 734 Franklin Avenue, #5 17 Garden City, NY 11 530 )&chard F. Pevarski (P) ;/ Chief Executive Officer T T Virhinia Utility Protection Services, LLL 1829 Blue Hills Circle, NE Roanoke, VA 242 12 1’’ Eric E. Thomas (I) Director of Engineerin Southern Natural Gas i? ompany Post Office Box 2563 Birmingham, AL 35202 / J Dr. Theodore Willke (P) (Chair) TLW Solutions, Inc. 1804 Cheviot Road Sewickley, PA 15 143 k m e s F. Wunderlin, P.E. (I) ,,‘ Vice President, Engineering 1/ Southwest Gas Corporation 5241 Sprin Mountain Road Las Vegas, %v 89105-0002 Commissjon 160 North LaSalle Street, Suite C-800 Chicago, IL 60601 I John Spencer Leks (G) Federa. GeoloY Epergy Regulatory Commlssion 888 First Street, NE - Room 62-41 Washington, DC 20426#

Page 19TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardlms Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. x The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts I91 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes a!.e made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. . .. Signature Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 20TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2 . - d - The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes arc: made (attach additional sheets if necessary). The suggestion by RSP, Inc. has merit in that it is unclear whether the direction of flow across the OCS/state water boundary is relevant. It should be reworded to make it clear that "the last production" facility could be in state waters and the exemption would still apply. Possible wording: Pipelines that are producer-operated and that cross the Outer Continental ShelfXtate waters boundary, upstream of the last valve on the last production facility (excluding pipeline risers and associated safety equipment) prior to connection to a transporting operator's facili 9. 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1 T#

Page 21TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMI rTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COiMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are technicallj* feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. __- The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are technicall). feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes ire made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. - The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1 /."g:d' /' L. ?+' -4y - & t' -'-- y,2i , _ _ ,": ~ L ~ g y ~ y c ,#

Page 22TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMII'TEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazar,dous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at thc address given below: 1- ~ / The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are technicallj. feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are technicallq feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes ire made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. ~ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are not (or carmot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 23TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29, 2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at thc address given below: 1. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. ____ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes ;ire made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. ~ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are not (or car.not be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Date I Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 24Duke Energy, Gas Transmission A Duke Energy Company Duke Energy G IS Transmission C orporation 5400 Westheimer Ct. Houston, TX 771356-53 i o Mailing Address P. 0. Box 1642 Houston, TX 77251-1642 , - . . . December 3,2002 Ms. Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 'Washington, DC 20590 RE: TPSSC Ballot Producer-Operated OCS Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Ms. Whetsel, Please find enclosed the TPSSC ballot from Andy Drake on the above referenced vote. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 713-627-6389. Sincerely, Christi L. Carlson#

Page 253.-.- TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMI'lTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. ~ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes :ire made (attach additional sheets if necessary). The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 26U.S. Department of Transporfation Research and Special Programs Administration 400 Seventh St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE (THLPSSC) MEMBERS OF THE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE (TPSSC) Stacey L. Gerard, Asso for Pipeline Safety Request for Vote by Letter Ballot on the Proposed Rulemaking: Pipeline Safety: Producer-Operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters (67 FR 1635 5 ) At the THLPSSC and TPSSC committee meeting held on February 6-7,2001, the committees were briefed on the proposals that appear in the attached notice, “Pipeline Safety: Producer-Operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters.” To publish a final rule, the Department of Transportation is required to obtain a peer review from members of the technical advisory committees and to obtain a vote on the proposed amendments. Therefore, please review the attached Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NF’RM) and briefing paper dated February 2001 and cast your vote on these amendments by letter ballot (attached). Please fonvard completed ballots to Cheryl Whetsel, Advisory Committee Coordinator by November 29, 2002. If you have any questions conceming the content of the NPRM, please contact L.E. Herrick, at (202) 366-5523 or Richard Huriaux, (202) 366-4565. Attachments -, . I / r#

Page 27TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. =)( The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. //’- 27-02 Siinature Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 28TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMM1TT:EE TECHNICAL, PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and retum this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. (k The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. ~ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. -- The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Date 4b~ Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation#

Page 29TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITq'EE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazarda us Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5, 2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29, 2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. / The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are techcally feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U. S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 30CORRECTED BALLOT - 12/6/02 TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMIT TEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes a -e made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. ' / Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 31TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMIT'TEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 1 95 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 1 95 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3, ___ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. I ABSTAIN. Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 32TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUrD PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMIT’I’EE TECHNICAL PTPELLNE SAFETY S T A h ? ) W S COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (”RM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Ha.zardi)us Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1- - x The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2- - The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1, 192 and I95 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-efkctive, and practicable if the following changes a e made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191,192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special P r o p ” U.S. Departnient of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7125 Wsshingron, DC 20590 Telsphone: (202) 365-4431 Administration#

Page 33Now 20 0 2 ll:25a T h e o d o r e L. Willke / I , 412./41 /4 /d TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDAFWS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardou:; Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters PubIished April 5, 2002 Please check one box and return this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given beIow: 1. ~ J/ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. ____ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes are made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3. ~ The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 are not (or cannot be made) technicdy feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 'si giiature Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#

Page 34. . . J , ,. . TECHNICAL HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE TECHNICAL PIPELINE SAFETY STANDARDS COMMITTEE Ballot for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters Published April 5,2002 Please check one box and retum this ballot by November 29,2002, to Cheryl Whetsel at the address given below: 1. )( The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. 2. The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 191 , 192 and 195 are technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable if the following changes ar: made (attach additional sheets if necessary). 3.- The proposed amendments to 49 CFR Parts 19 1 , 192 and 195 are not (or cannDt be made) technically feasible, reasonable, cost-effective, and practicable. Signature Date Cheryl Whetsel Research and Special Programs Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 7128 Washington, DC 20590 Telephone: (202) 366-443 1#