[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 166 (Friday, August 27, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52747-52749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-19572]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs Administration

[Docket No. RSPA-03-15122; Notice 3]


Pipeline Safety: Grant of Waiver; Duke Energy Gas Transmission 
Company

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

ACTION: Notice; grant of waiver.

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

SUMMARY: Duke Energy Gas Transmission Company (DEGT) petitioned the 
Research and Special Programs Administration's Office of Pipeline 
Safety (RSPA/OPS) for waiver of compliance with 49 CFR 192.611, which 
requires natural gas pipeline operators to confirm or revise the 
maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of a pipeline after a 
change in class location. DEGT proposed an alternative set of risk 
control activities in lieu of a reduction in pressure or pressure 
testing of certain pipeline segments in Pennsylvania in areas that have 
changed from Class 1 to Class 2.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In a September 13, 2002, letter, as supplemented by a letter dated 
February 28, 2003, DEGT requested a waiver of compliance with 49 CFR 
192.611, which requires pipeline operators to confirm or revise the 
MAOP on their pipelines after a change in class location. DEGT 
identified changes from Class 1 to Class 2 in four gas transmission 
pipeline segments in Pennsylvania on DEGT's Lines 12 and 19, two 
parallel pipelines that are part of its Texas Eastern Pipeline System. 
DEGT proposed to conduct alternative risk control activities based on 
Integrity Management Program principles and requirements in lieu of 
compliance with 192.611 and requested an extension of the 18-month time 
limit to allow it to develop and propose the alternative activities. On 
June 11, 2003, RSPA/OPS published a notice in the Federal Register 
seeking comment on DEGT's request for an extension of time (68 FR 
35051). No comments were received in response to this Notice. Following 
several consultations with RSPA/OPS, on October 7, 2003, DEGT presented 
its alternative technical proposal and asserted that the alternative 
risk control activities would provide a level of safety at least 
equivalent to that provided by compliance with the requirements of 
192.611. Pursuant to RSPA/OPS' request, DEGT also provided information 
concerning the cause of a November 2, 2003, failure on DEGT's Line 15, 
a 30-inch pipeline running between Danville and Owingsville, Kentucky.

DEGT's Proposed Waiver

    DEGT's waiver request involves four segments on its 24-inch Line 12 
and its 30-inch Line 19 (the ``waiver segments''). The waiver segments 
were constructed between 1954 and 1963 and were hydrotested to at least 
100% of the pipe's specified minimum yield strength (SMYS), except for 
10 feet of pipe on the Bechtelsville compressor discharge line that was 
tested to 90% SMYS. DEGT identified the waiver segments and the areas 
within each segment that have changed from Class 1 to Class 2 as 
follows:

1. Entriken Compressor Station Discharge (Mile Post (MP) 84.02-110.92)
    Line 12: MP 103.27-104.13.
    Line 19: MP 103.28-104.14.
2. Perulack Compressor Station Discharge (MP 110.94-138.35)
    Line 12: MP 128.02-128.28; MP 128.43-128.49; MP 131.24-131.56; and 
MP 132.06-132.36.
    Line 19: MP 128.00-128.28; MP 128.43-128.48; MP 131.25-131.42; MP 
131.51-131.57; and MP 132.05-132.35.
3. Bernville Compressor Station Discharge (MP 194.17-223.52)
    Line 12: MP 201.11-201.53.
    Line 19: MP 201.11-201.52.
4. Bechtelsville Compressor Station Discharge (MP 223.53-263.39)
    Line 12: MP 228.13-228.28; MP 251.45-251.81; MP 259.59-259.89; and 
MP 260.89-261.28.
    Line 19: MP 228.18-228.28; MP 251.47-251.81; MP 260.17-260.17; and 
MP 261.00-261.57.

    DEGT requested that the waiver be immediately applicable to the 
specified areas within each of the waiver segments where the class 
location has changed. DEGT further requested that the waiver be 
applicable to any Class 1

[[Page 52748]]

pipe that changes from Class 1 to Class 2 in the future anywhere within 
the four waiver segments.
    DEGT presented the following justifications for its waiver request:
     Under its risk management program, DEGT has verified the 
integrity of the pipe in all four waiver segments by conducting in-line 
inspections (ILIs). DEGT first inspected the pipelines in 1986 using 
Tuboscope's conventional magnetic flux leakage (MFL) tool. Between 1996 
and 2002, DEGT performed a second inspection of these lines using 
Tuboscope's conventional MFL tool and Tuboscope's high-resolution MFL 
tool.
     DEGT inspected and evaluated the condition of the pipe 
coating and evaluated the cathodic protection current demands on each 
of the pipelines. DEGT reported that the coatings were in good 
condition and that the cathodic protection systems were not 
experiencing excessive current demands.
     DEGT contends that the proposed alternative risk control 
activities would provide a margin of safety and environmental 
protection that equals or exceeds that of the measures required under 
192.611.
     Granting the waiver would avoid the delivery 
interruptions, supply shortages, and costs associated with excavating 
and replacing the pipe in the specified areas.
     The proposed alternative risk control activities would 
benefit the entire length of the four waiver segments, as opposed to 
only the limited portions associated with the current class changes.
    On January 15, 2004, RSPA/OPS published a notice in the Federal 
Register requesting public comment on DEGT's waiver request and the 
proposed alternative risk control activities (69 FR 2386). No comments 
were received in response to this Notice.

Grant of Waiver

    Based on DEGT's justifications and because DEGT will conduct 
alternative risk control activities, RSPA/OPS finds that a waiver is 
not inconsistent with pipeline safety. Therefore, DEGT's request for 
waiver of the requirements of 192.611 for changes from Class 1 to Class 
2 within the Entriken, Perulack, Bernville, and Bechtelsville segments 
of Lines 12 and 19 is granted on the condition that DEGT complies with 
the following requirements and conducts the following activities on 
schedule:
    1. In-line inspections must have been conducted on all site(s) 
covered by this waiver at least twice using a magnetic flux leakage 
(MFL) tool capable of detecting corrosion anomalies;
    2. All actionable anomalies within the waiver site(s) must have 
either been remediated, or scheduled to be investigated and if 
necessary subsequently remediated, in accordance with ASME B31.8S and 
DEGT's Pipeline Repair Procedures.
    3. For sites within the waiver segments changing from Class 1 to 
Class 2 in the future, DEGT must provide notification to RSPA/OPS prior 
to applying the waiver and a schedule of any remedial measures to be 
performed on future waiver sites must be submitted in advance to RSPA/
OPS headquarters and the Eastern Regional Office;
    4. For future sites covered by this waiver, DEGT must use the tools 
and techniques developed through the activities described in the waiver 
request and associated submissions involving the identification, 
classification, and possible remediation of dents;
    5. The waiver sites must pass a hydrostatic test to a pressure of 
at least 125% of the MAOP of the pipeline. DEGT must make available to 
RSPA/OPS a report on all hydrostatic test failures experienced at this 
test pressure;
    6. Subsequent in-line inspections for the waiver sites must be 
scheduled in accordance with the re-inspection criteria developed under 
Item No. 5 in Calendar Year 2004;
    7. The waiver sites must be in compliance with ASME B31.8S criteria 
for stress corrosion cracking (SCC) site identification and site 
investigation/testing (including any additional criteria developed in 
conjunction with SCC activities under Item No. 7 in Calendar Year 
2004);
    8. All pipeline sites covered under this waiver must conform to the 
required maximum reassessment intervals specified in 192.939; and
    9. DEGT must provide the RSPA/OPS' Eastern Region with sufficient 
notice to enable RSPA/OPS staff to attend and participate in all risk 
assessment activities.
    Schedule of activities to maintain the pipeline integrity on the 
waiver segments--

In Calendar Year 2003

    1. Conduct a close-interval survey on one line in the Perulack 
segment to support the development of confirmatory direct assessment 
protocols;
    2. Conduct a direct current voltage gradient (DCVG) survey on one 
line in the Perulack segment (same line as Item No. 1 above ) to 
support external corrosion direct assessment (ECDA) validations;

In Calendar Year 2004

    3. Conduct a high-resolution MFL tool run for the Bechtelsville 
segment, Line 12;
    4. Conduct high-resolution geometry tool runs on the Entriken 
segment, Line 19; the Perulack segment, Line 19; and the Bechtelsville 
segment, Line 12;
    5. Develop criteria and a decision tree for determination of in-
line inspection (ILI) re-inspection interval;
    6. Develop calibration and validation methodology and decision tree 
for ILI that incorporates API 1163 (currently under development);
    7. Develop a SCC management plan consistent with ASME B31.8S that 
includes hydrostatic test criteria, site selection criteria, and SCC 
excavation criteria;
    8. Develop an investigation strategy for topside dents and best 
practice responses to topside dents caused by third party damage;
    9. Provide site and operating support for the Pipeline Research 
Council International, Inc. (PRCI) Compendium of Best Practices and 
Emerging Technologies for the prevention and detection of outside 
damage to pipeline with P-PIC that will develop a user guide for 
outside force damage technologies;
    10. Develop a Web site accessible by RSPA/OPS on waiver-related 
sites and data. Provide public access to the website as needed to 
support the application of API RP 1162;
    11. Deploy acoustic monitoring technology in conjunction with a 
GTI/Battelle research project at a site to be determined for a data 
gathering test period of one year;

In Calendar Year 2005

    12. Overlay the high-resolution MFL data with the high-resolution 
geometry tool run data on the Entriken segment, Line 19; the Perulack 
segment, Line 19; and the Bechtelsville segment, Line 12. Overlay 
available hydrostatic test data from the Bechtelsville segment Lines 12 
and 19 with identified dents. Overlays will be used in an effort to 
refine dent remediation criteria; and
    13. Develop criteria for safe in service investigation of dents.
    In addition to the above requirements, DEGT will adhere to the 
following reporting requirements as a condition of this grant of 
waiver:
    Within three months following approval of a class location waiver 
and annually thereafter, the operator will be required to report the 
following:

[[Page 52749]]

    1. Define the economic benefit to the company. This should address 
both the cost avoided from not replacing the pipe as well as the added 
costs of the inspection program (required for the initial report only);
    2. The results of any ILI or direct assessments performed within 
the inspection area containing the waiver location(s) during the 
previous year;
    3. Any new integrity threats identified within the inspection area 
containing the waiver location(s) during the previous year;
    4. Any encroachment in the inspection area including the waiver 
location(s), including new residences (by number) or areas of public 
congregation;
    5. Any incidents associated with the inspection area containing the 
waiver location(s) that occurred during the previous year. (both 
reportable and non reportable);
    6. Any leaks on the pipeline in the inspection area containing the 
waiver location(s) that occurred during the previous year. (both 
reportable and non reportable);
    7. All repairs on the pipeline in the inspection area containing 
the waiver location(s) made during the previous year;
    8. On-going damage prevention initiatives on the pipeline in the 
inspection area containing the waiver location(s) and a discussion on 
its success; and
    9. Any mergers, acquisitions, transfers of assets, or other events 
affecting the regulatory responsibility of the company operating the 
pipeline to which the waiver applies.
    10. To the extent possible, describe in the first annual report the 
benefit to the public in terms of energy availability. This should 
address the benefit of avoided disruptions as a consequence of pipe 
replacement and the benefit of maintaining system capacity.

    Authority: 49 App. U.S.C. 60118(c) and 2015; and 49 CFR 1.53.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2004.
Stacey L. Gerard,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 04-19572 Filed 8-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P