[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 211 (Friday, October 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59024-59026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28959]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs Administration
[Docket No. RSPA-97-2707; Notice 2]


Pipeline Safety; Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities, Grant of 
Waiver; Applied LNG Technologies

    Applied LNG Technologies (ALT) petitioned the Research and Special 
Programs Administration (RSPA) for a waiver from compliance with 
certain provisions of 49 CFR Part 193 for its Needle Mountain Liquefied 
Natural Gas (LNG) storage and truck loading facility at Topock, 
Arizona. This facility consists of two, 50,000 gallon LNG storage tanks 
and a truck transfer system. The LNG is piped a short distance to a 
liquefaction facility owned and operated by a subsidiary of El Paso 
Natural Gas. A transmission pipeline, owned by El Paso Natural Gas 
Company, supplies Part 192 regulated gas to the El Paso Field Services, 
a liquefaction facility. Petitioner alleges that the Needle Mountain 
LNG storage and loading facility (NMF) is non-jurisdictional in 
accordance with Sections 193.2001(a) and (b)(1) because the facility 
would not be transporting natural gas by pipeline, but rather would be 
loading LNG into tank trucks for delivery to commercial and industrial 
customers. ALT claims that it's NMF is the ultimate consumer of LNG.
    On May 16, 1997, the RSPA issued a Interpretation of Part 193 as it 
applies to the NMF facility. In that interpretation, RSPA stated that 
regardless of who owns or operates different sections of an LNG 
facility, it is subject to Part 193 in its entirety. Part 193 
encompasses all parts of an LNG facility from the point at which it 
receives gas from a Part 192 regulated gas transmission pipeline 
through the liquefaction process, storage, and transfer into a motor 
carrier vehicle.
    Petitioner then requested a waiver from compliance with certain 
sections of Part 193 and proposed to ensure equivalent safety through 
compliance with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 
standard 59A. The specific sections of Part 193 for which Petitioner 
sought a waiver are:
    (1) Sec. 193.2173--Water Removal: Sec. 193.2173(a) requires that 
except for Class 1 systems, impounding systems must have sump pumps and 
piping over the dike to remove water collecting in the sump basin.
    NFPA 59A section 2-2.2.7 requires either sump pumps or gravity 
drainage for water removal, provided there is means to prevent the 
escape of LNG by way of the drainage system.
    Petitioner's rationale for noncompliance: The impoundment area in 
this facility drains to a sump basin. A sump dump is not provided due 
to the arid location. In the rare event of rain in Topock, AZ, 
Petitioner does not expect to have standing water for any length of 
time.
    RSPA proposed granting waiver from Sec. 193.2173 only if petitioner 
could demonstrate that there would be no standing water (i.e., proving 
ground is permeable) in the sump for any significant period.
    (2) Sec. 193.2209(b)(2)--Instrumentation for LNG storage tanks: For 
LNG tanks with capacity of 70,000 gallons or less, Sec. 193.2209(b)(2) 
requires pressure gages and recorders with high pressure alarm.
    NEPA 59A 7-2.1 requires only a pressure gage.
    Petitioner does not believe that safety has been compromised by 
requiring only a pressure gage, because any high pressure in the 
storage tank is controlled by a recompressor system within the 
``facility'' that maintains the storage pressure at 20 psig. Any 
failure of this system places the entire storage facility in a ``fail 
safe'' (shut down) mode.
    RSPA proposed not granting a waiver from Sec. 193.2209(b)(2) 
because, in our view recorders (at the storage tank site and possibly 
at the control center) and a high pressure alarm (at the control 
center) are essential in the event of the failure of the recompressor 
system. Although the entire storage facility will be placed in a shut 
down mode, there appears to be no way to prevent pressure from 
increasing in the LNG storage tank. This is especially important 
because this LNG storage facility will be an unattended operation.
    (3) Sec. 193.2321(a)--Nondestructive tests, Circumferential butt 
welds: Sec. 193.2321(a) requires that 100 percent of circumferential 
butt welded pipe joints in the cryogenic piping and 30 percent of 
circumferential butt welded pipe joints in the non-cryogenic piping be 
nondestructively tested.
    NEPA 59A 6-6.3.2 requires all circumferential butt welds to be 
nondestructively tested, except that liquid drain and vapor vent piping 
with an operating pressure that produces a hoop stress of less than 30 
percent of specified minimum yield stress (SMYS) need not be 
nondestructively tested,

[[Page 59025]]

provided it has been inspected visually in accordance with the American 
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) standard B31.3, Chemical Plant 
and Petroleum Refinery Piping, 344.2.
    RSPA considered granting a waiver from 193.2321(a) for the liquid 
drain and vapor vent piping with operating pressures that produce hoop 
stresses of less than 20 percent SMYS, if that piping complies with the 
NFPA 59A 6-6.3.2. We believe that safety is not comprised.
    (4) Sec. 193.2321(e)--Nondestructive test, Circumferential and 
longitudinal welds in metal shells of storage tanks: Sec. 193.2321(e) 
requires 100 percent of both longitudinal and circumferential butt 
welds in metal shells of storage tanks that are subject to cryogenic 
temperatures, and are under pressure, to be radiographically tested.
    NFPA 59A 4-2.2.2 requires welded construction for shell in 
accordance with the ASME Code section VIII, and shall be ASME-stamped 
and registered with the National board of Boiler and Pressure Vessels 
(NBBI)
    Petitioner's rationale for requesting a waiver is that safety in 
this case is not comprised as storage tanks at NMF facility are small, 
shop fabricated, and built to ASME Code. ASME Section VIII is an 
accepted standard to which cryogenic pressure vessels are built all 
over the world.
    RSPA proposed to grant a waiver from Sec. 193.2321(e), because we 
believe that safety is not compromised for smaller pressure vessels 
(less than 70,000 gallons) which are designed and built to ASME Code 
VIII (greater than 15 psig). Tanks built to this code are shop 
fabricated under strict quality control and are inspected and stamped 
by the Authorized Inspectors of the NBBI. Storage tanks at the NMF 
facility are built to ASME code Section VIII and have a capacity of 
50,000 gallons (relatively small).
    (5) Secs. 193.2329 (a) and (b)--Construction Records: 
Sec. 193.2329(a) requires that an operator shall retain records of 
specifications, procedures, and drawings consistent with this part, and 
Sec. 193.2329(b) requires that an operator shall retain records of 
results of tests, inspections and quality assurance program required by 
this subpart.
    Petitioner requested a waiver for records for design and 
manufacture of the pressure vessels, because they are built to the ASME 
code as referenced in NFPA 59A. Petitioner would comply with all other 
recordkeeping requirements in accordance with Secs. 193.2329 (a) and 
(b).
    RSPA proposed to grant waiver from Secs. 193.2329 (a) and (b) for 
those parts of the NMF facility where the petitioner has requested.
    (6) Sec. 193.2431 (c)--Vents: Sec. 193.2431(c) requires that 
venting of natural gas/vapor under operational control which could 
produce a hazardous gas atmosphere must be directed to a flare stack of 
heat exchanger.
    NFPA 59A 3-4.5 also requires safe discharge of boil-off and flash 
gas to the atmosphere or into a closed system. NFPA 10-12.4.4 requires 
that safety relief valve discharge stacks or vents shall discharge 
directly into the atmosphere.
    Petitioner requested a waiver from Sec. 193.2431(c) which requires 
flare stacks. Petitioner's reasons for noncompliance are that (i) 
safety relief valves relieve under emergency conditions, and (ii) there 
will be no boil-off venting at this facility because LNG storage 
vessels are maintained at a storage pressure of 20 psi by a 
recompressor system.
    RSPA agrees that at the NMF facility recompressor system will 
maintain a pressure of 20 psi in the LNG storage tanks. Therefore, no 
continuous discharge of boil-off to atmosphere is expected. We believe 
that relief valves discharge only under emergency conditions. 
Therefore, it is safe to discharge them to the atmosphere through a 
stack without flaring. Based on that information, RSPA proposed to 
grant a waiver from compliance with Sec. 193.2431(c), as long as relief 
valves discharge through stacks were higher than surrounding structures 
at this facility.
    (7) Sec. 193.2817(b)(2)--Fire Equipment: Sec. 193.2817(b)(2) 
requires fire control equipment and supplies to include a water supply 
and associated delivery system, if the total inventory of LNG is 70,000 
gallons.
    NFPA 59A 9-5.1 similarly requires a water system except where an 
evaluation in accordance with 9-1.2 indicates the use of water is 
unnecessary or impractical. Section 9-1.2 also requires evaluation of 
the methods necessary for protection of the equipment and structures 
from the effects of fire exposure.
    Petitioner requested a waiver from Sec. 193.2817(b)(2), citing 
exemption in paragraph 9-5.1 of the NEPA 59A. Petitioner's rationale 
for such a waiver was that this facility is remotely located, generally 
unattended, and is equipped with fire detection sensors which will 
annunciate fire detection to the control center, as well as initiate a 
facility shutdown to a fail-safe condition.
    RSPA disagreed with Petitioner's rationale that water was 
unnecessary and impractical at this facility and proposed not to grant 
waiver from Sec. 193.2817(b)(2). RSPA argued that a fire protection 
water system was necessary for protection of the components and for 
controlling unignited leaks and spills at the NMF facility. RSPA also 
believed that providing a water system at this facility was feasible.
    After reviewing the petition, the RSPA published a notice inviting 
interested persons to comment on this waiver (Notice 1) (62 FR 41993; 
August 4, 1997). RSPA received no comments in response to the notice.
    On August 12, 1997, two pipeline safety inspectors from the Arizona 
Public Utility Commission, one inspector from the Office of Pipeline 
Safety (OPS), Southwest Region office and one representative from the 
OPS headquarters visited the NMF facility. The purpose of this trip was 
to get more facts and discuss the above issues with the representatives 
of the ALT, ElPaso Natural Gas Company and its subsidiary. At this 
meeting ALT was advised to provide a formal report addressing firewater 
requirements and a letter from the NFPA confirming the fact that an 
exception to this requirement is allowed when the evaluation required 
by Section 9-1.2 of the NFPA 59A indicates the use of water is 
unnecessary or impractical. All other issues in this petition were 
verified and agreed by all parties.
    Subsequently, Petitioner in support of its waiver, has provided: 
(1) a report of the ``percolation test'', proving the ground near the 
facility is permeable, dated August 12, 1997, prepared by Western 
Technologies, Inc.; (2) drawings and data report on ``heat flux 
exclusion zones'' and ``Degadis Analysis''; (3) a formal report on 
``fire water requirement determination'' dated September 30, 1997, 
developed by CH-IV Corporation; and (4) an interpretation letter from 
the NFPA dated October 1, 1997.
    After a thorough review of the CH-IV Corporation's report, RSPA is 
not convinced with the conclusions that the lack of a fire water supply 
may not significantly increase foreseeable consequences of fires, 
including the failure of components or buildings within the facility.
    RSPA notes that the above referenced NFPA interpretation letter 
states that Standard 59A permits the use of other fire protection 
systems (exclusive of a fixed water system) if an evaluation of the 
facility shows that the use of water is unnecessary or impractical. The 
NFPA letter further states that fire protection must be provided for 
all LNG facilities, and that water is the preferred

[[Page 59026]]

fire protection agent, but it is not mandated. The CH-IV report on the 
need for LNG fire fighting protection systems at the ALT facility 
describes fire detection, equipment shutdown and control systems. 
However, it does not address what other fire protection systems (in 
lieu of fixed water system) be utilized to prevent fire from spreading. 
Thus, it does not satisfy paragraph 9-1.2(c) of NFPA 59A, which states 
``The methods necessary for protection of the equipment and structures 
from the effects of fire exposure.'' RSPA has also concerns about 
safety of the Mojave Compressor Station (MCS) and its day-shift 
personnel. According to ALT's drawings MCS lies clearly within the 
``lower explosive limit'' of the ALT facility. Therefore, it lies 
within the perimeter where fire could occur as result of vapor 
dispersion.
    Based on the above discussion, RSPA is not granting a waiver from 
the firewater requirements in Sec. 193.2817(b)(2). RSPA, however, may 
consider any other alternative fire protection systems satisfying 
Section 9-1.2(c) of NFPA 59A.
    Except for the sections for which RSPA is granting a waiver, this 
LNG facility must meet all the other requirements of Part 193. For the 
sections for which RSPA is granting a waiver, RSPA believes that the 
granting of a waiver from these requirements would not be inconsistent 
with pipeline safety, as long as Petitioner follows alternative 
provisions in the NFPA 59A. Therefore, ALT's petition for waiver from 
compliance with above specified sections of 49 CFR 193 is granted, 
effective October 31, 1997.

    Authority: 49 App. U.S.C. 2002(h) and 2015; and 49 CFR 1.53.

    Issued in Washington, D.C. on October 27, 1997.
Richard B. Felder,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 97-28959 Filed 10-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-M