[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 230 (Monday, December 1, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67128-67129]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-29853]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs Administration

49 CFR Part 192

[Docket No. RSPA-03-16330; Notice 4]
RIN 2137-AB71


Pipeline Safety: Passage of Internal Inspection Devices

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for information.

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

SUMMARY: On April 12, 1994, RSPA issued a regulation requiring pipeline 
operators to design and construct certain new transmission lines and 
certain existing line sections that contain replaced pipe or components 
to accommodate the passage of instrumented internal inspection devices. 
Responding to petitions for reconsideration, we suspended enforcement 
on some facilities and invited comments on proposed changes to the 
regulation. To help us reach a

[[Page 67129]]

final decision on the petitions and issues raised by commenters, this 
notice seeks responses to the questions stated below under 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION concerning offshore gas transmission lines.

DATES: Persons interested in submitting written responses to the 
questions posed in this document must do so by December 31, 2003.

ADDRESSES: You may submit written responses by mailing or delivering an 
original and two copies to the Dockets Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590-0001. The Dockets Facility is open from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except on Federal holidays when the facility is closed. 
Alternatively, you may submit written responses to the docket 
electronically at the following Web address: http://dms.dot.gov. All 
written responses should identify the docket and notice numbers stated 
in the heading of this notice. Anyone who wants confirmation of mailed 
responses must include a self-addressed stamped postcard. To file 
written responses electronically, after logging on to http://dms.dot.gov, click on ``Comment/Submissions.'' You can also read all 
responses in the docket at http://dms.dot.gov.
    The previous record of this proceeding is in Docket No. PS-126. You 
can read comments and other material in this docket at the Nassif 
Building, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room 7128, 400 Seventh 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. For access to this docket, 
please call Jenny Donohue at (202) 366-4046.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments 
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual 
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf 
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit 
http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L. M. Furrow by phone at 202-366-4559, 
by fax at 202-366-4566, by mail at U.S. Department of Transportation, 
400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590, or by e-mail at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Following Congressional mandates,\1\ RSPA published regulations (49 
CFR 192.150 and 195.120) requiring that, except where impracticable, 
operators of gas and hazardous liquid pipelines must design and 
construct certain pipelines to accommodate the passage of instrumented 
internal inspection devices, or smart pigs (59 FR 17281; Apr. 12, 
1994). In response to petitions for reconsideration from the American 
Gas Association and the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America 
(INGAA), we proposed to modify provisions of Sec.  192.150 that apply 
to offshore transmission lines and that require removal of smart pig 
obstructions from transmission line sections (59 FR 49896; Sept. 30, 
1994). In addition, pending completion of the rulemaking, we suspended 
enforcement of Sec.  192.150 on offshore transmission lines and on 
onshore transmission line sections except replacement parts (60 FR 
7133; Feb. 7, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Sections 108(b) and 207(b) of the Pipeline Safety 
Reauthorization Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-561; Oct. 31, 1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One of the issues raised by INGAA's petition and by comments on the 
proposed modification of Sec.  192.150 concerns the applicability of 
Sec.  192.150 to new offshore transmission lines 10 inches or larger. 
INGAA and industry commenters strongly suggested the rule should exempt 
all offshore transmission lines. The reasons were increased design and 
construction costs and lack of benefits. In addition, the Technical 
Pipeline Safety Standard Committee, RSPA's advisory committee on 
proposed gas pipeline safety standards, supported industry's view at a 
meeting in Washington, DC, on May 2, 1995.
    In contrast, operators of hazardous liquid pipelines did not object 
to the similar pig-passage rule in Sec.  195.120 that applies to 
offshore pipelines 10 inches or larger. And the Marine Board, in a 1994 
study jointly sponsored by RSPA and the Minerals Management Service, 
``Improving the Safety of Marine Pipelines,'' recommended that ``[n]ew 
medium-to large-diameter pipelines running from platform to platform or 
platform to shore should be designed to accommodate smart pigs whenever 
reasonably practical.'' (The study is available at http://books.nap.edu/books/0309050472/ html/.)

Questions

    In light of this background and the considerable time since persons 
submitted written comments on the proposed changes to Sec.  192.150, we 
have the following questions:

--Do operators of offshore gas transmission lines still object to 
applying Sec.  192.150 to new offshore transmission lines 10 inches or 
larger?
--If the answer is yes, given that new hazardous liquid pipelines 10 
inches or larger are meeting Sec.  195.120, what differences are there 
between gas and liquid pipeline design and construction practices that 
would justify exempting new offshore gas transmission lines 10 inches 
or larger from Sec.  192.150?
--Regarding the Marine Board's recommendation, when would it not be 
``reasonably practical'' to design new gas transmission lines 10 inches 
or larger running between platforms or platforms and shore to 
accommodate the passage of smart pigs?

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 24, 2003.
Stacey L. Gerard,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 03-29853 Filed 11-28-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P