[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 188 (Thursday, September 29, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24081]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: September 29, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programs Administration
[Docket No. P-93-2W; Notice 1]

 

Interstate Natural Gas Association of America; Filing of Gas 
Pipeline Facility Waiver Petition

agency: Research and Special Programs Administration, DOT.

action: Notice of intent.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

summary: The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA), on 
behalf of 28 INGAA member pipeline companies and their subsidiaries, 
has petitioned the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) 
for a waiver from compliance with the requirements of 49 CFR 192.713(a) 
and 192.485 to allow the installation of a proprietary composite 
reinforced (CR) sleeve material (Clock SpringTM manufactured by 
Clock Spring Company of North America, Long Beach, CA) as a full 
encirclement wrapped sleeve for the repair of imperfections and damages 
that impair the serviceability of steel transmission pipelines 
operating at or above 40 percent of specified minimum yield strength 
(SMYS). RSPA intends to grant a waiver to each of the parties 
represented in the petition because the use of this technology provides 
at least the same level of integrity as replacement pipe or 
installation of a full encirclement welded split sleeve.

for further information contact: G. Joseph Wolf, Office of Pipeline 
Safety (DPS-13), Research and Special Programs Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, 202-366-4560.

supplementary information: Federal pipeline safety regulations (49 CFR 
192.713(a)) require that a full encirclement welded split sleeve be 
applied over an imperfection or damage that impairs the serviceability 
of a segment of a steel gas transmission line operating at or above 40 
percent of SMYS if it is not feasible to take the segment out of 
service for repair. Previously, RSPA granted a waiver (58 FR 13823; 
March 15, 1993) to the Panhandle Eastern Corporation (Panhandle) for 
the installation of CR sleeves as an alternative to this requirement. 
The Panhandle waiver applied to six locations on its line #2 in Fayette 
County, Ohio.
    The INGAA petition additionally requests a waiver from 
Sec. 192.485, requiring each segment of a transmission line with 
general corrosion and a remaining wall thickness less than that 
required for the pipeline's maximum allowable operating pressure be 
replaced, or the operating pressure be reduced commensurate with the 
strength of the pipe based on the actual remaining wall thickness. The 
petition for waiver requests that pipeline operators be permitted to 
use CR sleeve material for the repair of imperfections and damages that 
impair the serviceability of steel transmission pipelines operating at 
and above 40 percent of SMYS. Currently, Sec. 192.485 does not permit 
the repair of an area of general corrosion, unless the area is small.

Proposal and Rationale Submitted by INGAA

    The INGAA waiver request cites the Panhandle waiver and supporting 
documents, and proposes to conform to the Panhandle waiver except for 
deviations cited below. The proprietary repair method proposed by INGAA 
and Panhandle consists of installing CR sleeve material in coil form 
held in place by an adhesive. The adhesive adheres both to the pipe 
surface and to the adjacent layers of the coiled composite 
reinforcement. The composite reinforcement is an isophthalic polyester 
resin reinforced with fiberglass. The adhesive is a methacrylate. Both 
the composite reinforcement and the adhesive have histories of suitable 
performance in other applications described in documents in the docket.
    In the Panhandle petition, the suitability of a standard CR sleeve 
for repair of a measured defect is determined using a computer program 
developed by the Gas Research Institute (GRI). Panhandle reported that 
destructive tests of pipe with standard CR sleeves installed over 
manufactured defects repeatedly burst in the adjacent steel pipe, 
demonstrating the adequacy of the CR sleeves. The CR sleeve does not 
require pretesting, as there is no replacement pipe, nor are there any 
welds to be tested as required for welded split sleeves.
    Panhandle described the following advantages of using CR sleeves:
    (1) CR sleeve material is relatively easy to install.
    (2) CR sleeve material is furnished in standard widths and 
thicknesses. The length of the repair to be made determines the number 
of sleeve units to be used. Multiple units can be brought to the job 
site at the time of excavation. Therefore, there is no delay between 
determining the extent of the repair and procuring materials for 
repair.
    (3) The crew performing the investigation can make the repair 
without calling for pipe handling equipment or welders.
    (4) In most circumstances, there will be no need to take the line 
out of service, eliminating interruptions to, or curtailments of, 
customer service; CR sleeve repairs can be made while the line is 
operated at full or reduced pressure.
    (5) The use of CR sleeve material would substantially reduce cost 
as compared to the repair methods currently required under 
Sec. 192.713(a).
    Panhandle estimated that the average cost of a repair would be 
reduced from $26,000 for a pipe cutout or $16,000 for a welded split 
sleeve to $9,000 for a CR sleeve. The result would be a maximum savings 
of $17,000 per replacement repair or a minimum of $7,000 per welded 
split sleeve repair.
    In commenting on the notice of the Panhandle waiver (Docket No. P-
90-1W), the American Gas Association estimated that the industry could 
save $6,500,000 annually by using CR sleeves in the manner proposed by 
Panhandle. By requesting a waiver of Sec. 192.485 to use CR sleeves 
under broader conditions than those proposed by Panhandle, INGAA's 
proposal has the potential for even greater savings.
    RSPA granted Panhandle the waiver on the conditions that Panhandle 
install the CR sleeves using the procedure described in the documents 
supporting its petition, perform the inspections described in the 
petition, report promptly to RSPA the results of the inspections and 
any unfavorable performance of the CR sleeves, and determine and report 
to RSPA the cause of any unfavorable performance.
    INGAA's waiver petition proposes that operators participating in 
the petition agree to certain additional and alternative conditions 
from those instituted in the Panhandle waiver. INGAA's waiver requires 
parties to the waiver petition to comply with all of the conditions of 
the Panhandle waiver for which deviations have not been requested. 
Details of INGAA's requested deviations from the conditions of the 
Panhandle waiver are presented and discussed in the following 
paragraphs.

Deviations From Panhandle Waiver

    The Panhandle waiver provided that an analysis for serviceability 
of corroded areas would be determined using ANSI/ASME B31G ``Manual for 
Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines.'' INGAA 
proposes that the analysis for serviceability may alternatively be 
based on the RSTRENG User's Manual, March 1993. RSPA incorporated by 
reference both B31G and RSTRENG into Part 195 (59 FR 33389; June 28, 
1994). RSPA proposed the incorporation of B31G in Part 192 (57 FR 
39577; August 31, 1992). Comments on the proposal suggested 
incorporation by reference of RSTRENG into Part 192 in addition to 
B31G. RSPA considers that either B31G or RSTRENG is suitable for 
determining the serviceability of steel pipe.
    INGAA reports that, since the Panhandle waiver was granted, GRI has 
developed an enhanced model called GRI WRAP for calculating the 
efficacy of a composite repair. INGAA proposes using GRI WRAP in lieu 
of the model used by Panhandle. RSPA proposes to accept INGAA's 
decision to use the GRI WRAP model.
    INGAA proposes that only those pipeline operators included in it's 
petition be allowed to us the CR sleeve repair method. INGAA's 
understanding that RSPA will not accept individual pipeline operator 
waiver petitions for using this repair method is misguided. RSPA must 
consider all waiver applications.
    INGAA proposes that installation of CR sleeves by the participating 
pipeline operators be coordinated with GRI to ensure sufficient 
operational and geographic diversity is achieved to obtain a 
representative data set to support any further change to the pipeline 
safety regulations. GRI will assist companies to evaluate the 
installations, record the results, and provide the data to RSPA upon 
request. A statistical sampling of sites will be excavated and 
evaluated within two years of installation.
    INGAA proposes that installations of CR sleeves will be reported by 
the operator to RSPA or a designated state agent office within thirty 
days of installation. RSPA considers that it is more appropriate that 
the notification be made to both RSPA and its designated state agent, 
and that the notification be made prior to installation to afford RSPA 
and the state agent the opportunity to witness the installation.
    INGAA proposes that operator personnel using the CR sleeve 
(ClockspringTM) repair method be trained and certified in standard 
installation procedures by the Clock Spring Company LP. RSPA considers 
that such training and certification is appropriate and should be 
supplemented by a commitment to periodic refresher training and 
recertification of installers of CR sleeves.
    INGAA proposes that records of CR sleeve installations will be 
maintained in accordance with Sec. 192.709. RSPA considers that the 
proposal regarding records is appropriate.

Proposed Action on Waiver Request

    In addition to the advantages cited by INGAA and Panhandle, RSPA 
considers that the ability to make a repair without welding eliminates 
the possibility of cracking and pipeline failure attributable to 
residual stresses from, and to hydrogen induced cracking associated 
with, welding. Also eliminated is the possibility of burning through 
the pipe wall while welding. Overall, RSPA considers the CR sleeve 
repair procedure to be a safe alternative to either the welded split 
sleeve repair procedure or the pipe replacement procedure, both 
currently permitted by Sec. 192.713(a). While RSPA considers that the 
use of the CR sleeve repair procedure in an area of general corrosion 
is an acceptable alternative to replacing the corroded pipe or reducing 
the operating pressure commensurate with the strength of the steel pipe 
based on the actual remaining wall thickness under Sec. 192.485(a), 
comments are requested on this aspect of the waiver request.
    RSPA believes that 49 CFR 192.713(a) and .485(a) should be waived 
to permit the parties represented by the petitioner to install CR 
sleeves as a permanent repair of imperfections and damages that impair 
the serviceability of steel transmission pipelines operating at or 
above 40 percent of SMYS. RSPA believes that the use of this technology 
provides at least the same level of integrity as replacement of pipe or 
installation of a full encirclement welded split sleeve. Although RSPA 
believes that there is no practical limit to the extent of a corroded 
area repairable using CR sleeves, RSPA proposes that repairs using CR 
sleeves in accordance with the proposed waiver be limited to 10 feet of 
sleeve length.
    A waiver would be granted to each of the parties represented in the 
petition for the purpose of evaluating the performance of CR sleeves. 
RSPA intends to review the performance evaluations of CR sleeves 
applied under the proposed waiver and consider a termination of the 
waiver three years after it is granted.
    Information submitted by INGAA is available in the docket. The 
information cited by INGAA in the grant of waiver to Panhandle is 
available in docket P-90-1W.
    Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed waiver by 
submitting in duplicate such data, views, or judgments as they may 
desire. Communications should identify the Docket and Notice numbers in 
the heading of this document, and be submitted to: Dockets Unit, Room 
8421, Office of Pipeline Safety, Research and Special Programs 
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 
20590-0001, (202) 366-5046.
    All comments received before [30 days after publication of this 
notice] will be considered before final action is taken. Late filed 
comments will be considered so far as practicable. All comments will be 
available for viewing between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., before 
and after the closing date for comments.
    No public hearing is contemplated, but one may be held at a time 
and place set in a Notice in the Federal Register if requested by an 
interested person desiring to comment at a public hearing and raising a 
genuine issue.

    Dated: September 19, 1994.
George W. Tenley, Jr.,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety, Research and Special 
Programs Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-24081 Filed 9-28-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-M