[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 132 (Monday, July 12, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41761-41762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-15654]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs Administration

49 CFR Part 193

[Docket No. RSPA-03-14456]
RIN 2137-AD80


Pipeline Safety: Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities; Clarifying and 
Updating Safety Standards

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

ACTION: Final rule; petition for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: In the Federal Register of March 10, 2004, RSPA published a 
final rule concerning liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities. The final 
rule clarified that regulations governing the fire protection of LNG 
facilities apply to facilities in existence or under construction as of 
March 31, 2000. The final rule also updated a reference to fire 
protection provisions of the National Fire Protection Association 
(NFPA) standard, NFPA 59A, from the 1996 edition to the 2001 edition of 
that standard. The American Gas Association submitted a petition for 
reconsideration of the final rule, requesting changes in the fire 
protection requirements. The present action responds to that petition 
and clarifies requirements that involve provisions of NFPA 59A.

DATES: This action takes effect August 11, 2004.

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 7th St., SW., Washington, DC 20590, or by e-mail at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 10, 2004, RSPA published a final rule that, inter alia, 
amended regulations in 49 CFR part 193 related to the fire protection 
of LNG facilities used in gas pipeline transportation (69 FR 11330). An 
amendment to 49 CFR 193.2005 clarified that the fire protection 
requirements of part 193 (contained in Sec.  193.2801, Fire protection) 
apply to LNG facilities existing on March 31, 2000. In addition, an 
amendment to Sec.  193.2801 clarified which provisions of NFPA 59A, 
``Standard for the Production, Storage, and Handling of Liquefied 
Natural Gas (LNG)'' were incorporated by reference. That amendment also 
provided an extended compliance time for actions to be taken regarding 
certain systems and personnel qualification. A separate amendment 
updated all part 193 references to the 1996 edition of NFPA 59A to the 
2001 edition of that standard.

Petition for Reconsideration

    By letter dated April 8, 2004, the American Gas Association, a 
trade association representing operators of LNG facilities, submitted a 
petition for reconsideration of the final rule as it relates to the 
fire protection requirements of Sec.  193.2801. These requirements are 
as follows:
Section 193.2801 Fire protection.
    Each operator must provide and maintain fire protection at LNG 
plants according to sections 9.1 through 9.7 and section 9.9 of NFPA 
59A [2001 edition] * * *. However, LNG plants existing on March 31, 
2000, need not comply with provisions on emergency shutdown systems, 
water delivery systems, detection systems, and personnel qualification 
and training until September 12, 2005.
    The following is our response to the petition:
    As a general issue, the petitioner argues that there has not been 
sufficient opportunity to discuss retroactive application of sections 
9.1 through 9.7 and section 9.9 of NFPA 59A. To demonstrate this point, 
the petitioner states that the retroactive issue was left open at the 
Technical Pipeline Safety Standards Committee (TPSSC) meeting on July 
31, 2003, and that a workshop to clarify retroactive requirements, 
which was announced at the meeting, was not held.
    On the contrary, the TPSSC did complete its consideration of the 
proposal to apply NFPA 59A (2001 edition) fire protection requirements 
retroactively. It voted unanimously that the requirements should apply 
only to new LNG facilities (transcript p. 76 (motion to apply only to 
new facilities clarified) and p. 86 (motion passed with unrelated 
amendments)). We regret that the demand for expeditious action on the 
final rule did not allow time for the workshop. However, we believe the 
public proceedings that led to the final rule provided ample 
opportunity for operators to express their views on retroactivity 
consistent with applicable legal requirements.
    The petitioner also makes four specific requests. The first is that 
we remove the requirement that operators of LNG plants existing on 
March 31, 2000, provide and maintain fire protection according to 
sections 9.1 through 9.7 and section 9.9 of NFPA 59A (2001 edition). In 
support of this request, the petitioner contends that requiring 
operators to upgrade or retrofit their existing detection systems to 
meet the requirements of NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm Code, 1999 
edition, regardless of existing conditions, is impracticable and could 
result in unnecessary equipment or system changes.
    Under the final rule, such arbitrary upgrading or retrofitting is 
not mandatory. Compliance with NFPA 72 is governed by section 9.3.4 of 
NFPA 59A, which reads:
    The detection systems determined from the evaluation in 9.1.2 shall 
be designed, installed, and maintained in accordance with NFPA 72, 
National Fire Alarm Code, or NFPA 1221, Standard for the Installation, 
Maintenance, and Use of Public Fire Service Communication Systems, as 
applicable.
    Under section 9.1.2, operators have to determine the type, 
quantity, and location of equipment necessary for the

[[Page 41762]]

detection and control of certain fires, leaks, and spills ``by an 
evaluation based on sound fire protection engineering principles, 
analysis of local conditions, hazards within the facility, and exposure 
to or from other property.'' Reading sections 9.1.2 and 9.3.4 together, 
NFPA 72 requirements do not apply regardless of existing conditions, 
but in light of them. If an operator determines from the evaluation 
required by section 9.1.2 that the type, quantity, and location of 
existing detection equipment are adequate for fire protection, no 
upgrading or retrofitting is required. Also, even if an operator 
determines that the type, quantity, or location of existing detection 
equipment is inadequate for fire protection, only detection equipment 
that is changed or added would have to meet applicable NFPA 72 
requirements. In view of this clarification, we do not consider the 
upgrading issue a sufficient reason to grant the first request.
    As further justification for the first request, the petitioner 
asserts that to meet the training requirements of NFPA 72, many 
operators may contract out the maintenance of detection equipment. 
Doing so, the petitioner speculates, could degrade the quality of 
maintenance since only operators have firsthand experience and 
understanding of the equipment. We addressed this potential problem in 
the final rule by allowing operators until September 12, 2005, to train 
plant personnel according to NFPA 72 requirements. Since the 
petitioner's second request accedes to this deadline for training, we 
do not consider the training issue a sufficient reason to grant the 
first request.
    The petitioner's concern that operators may have to contract out 
the maintenance of detection equipment is apparently based on its 
belief that NFPA 72 requires the use of certified personnel for this 
maintenance. However, NFPA 72 does not mandate the use of certified 
personnel. Rather section 7-1.2.2 of NFPA 72 (1999 edition) requires 
that service personnel be qualified and experienced in the inspection, 
testing, and maintenance of fire alarm systems. While individuals 
certified by various organizations are included in examples of 
qualified personnel, individuals may be qualified otherwise. For 
example, personnel who meet the qualification requirements of 49 CFR 
193.2707, ``Operations and maintenance,'' for fire alarm system 
maintenance at LNG plants, would , in our view, also be qualified for 
that function under NFPA 72.
    The second request is that we limit the September 12, 2005, 
compliance deadline to reviewing equipment or systems and making 
required changes to training and procedures. The basis of this request 
is the petitioner's belief that operators are required to change 
existing equipment or systems ``regardless of whether it is 
appropriate.'' The petitioner argues that although this is not 
practicable, an engineering review and changes to training and 
procedures, once clarified, can be completed by the September 12, 2005, 
deadline. As clarified above, operators are required to make equipment 
or system changes only as determined by an evaluation of existing 
conditions. Given this clarification and because the petition does not 
specify which requirements related to training and procedures are 
considered unclear, we have not granted the second request.
    The third request is that we establish September 12, 2006, as the 
deadline for making equipment or system changes. The petitioner argues 
that for planning and budgeting reasons, operators are unlikely to 
complete the evaluation of existing equipment or systems and make all 
necessary changes before the September 12, 2005, deadline. Given the 
clarification above of what changes, if any, may be needed, there is 
insufficient evidence that operators will need additional compliance 
time for changes. Even if additional time is needed, 1 year may not be 
appropriate in all cases. Under these circumstances, we think the need 
to establish September 12, 2006, as the deadline for making equipment 
or system changes is unclear. Thus the third request is denied.
    The last request is that we hold a public meeting on the petition. 
Since this response clarifies requirements that are central to the 
petition, we do not believe a public meeting on the petition is 
necessary.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 2, 2004.
Stacey L. Gerard,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 04-15654 Filed 7-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-U