U. S. Department of Transportation

1

U. S. Department of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration
www.dot.gov
2
DOT (PHMSA) Pipeline Right-of-Way Maintenance
Why Now?
Restoring TrustIn Pipeline SafetyNew Orleans,
LANovember 2, 2006

Harold Winnie Community Assistance Technical
Services (CATS) ManagerCentral Region
3
Regulations

• 192.613 Continuing Surveillance.
• 192.705 Transmission lines Patrolling.
• 195.412 Inspection of rights-of-way and
  crossings under navigable waters
• 192.901 Subpart O- Pipeline Integrity
  Management
• 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high
  consequence areas.

4
192.613 Continuing Surveillance.

• (a) Each operator shall have a procedure for
  continuing surveillance of its facilities to
  determine and take appropriate action concerning
  changes in class location, failures, leakage
  history, corrosion, substantial changes in
  cathodic protection requirements, and other
  unusual operating and maintenance conditions.
• (b) If a segment of pipeline is determined to be
  in unsatisfactory condition but no immediate
  hazard exists, the operator shall initiate a
  program to recondition or phase out the segment
  involved, or, if the segment cannot be
  reconditioned or phased out, reduce the maximum
  allowable operating pressure in accordance with
  192.619 (a) and (b).

5
Continuing Surveillance

• Thank you for sending use information about using
  aerial video taping to assist in compliance with
  some of the gas pipeline safety standards in 49
  CFR Part 192.
• Most of the Part 192 standards are written in
  performance language. Such language does not
  specify how the standards are to be met. Rather,
  it allows pipeline operators to use whatever
  means are suitable to achieve compliance,
  including aerial video taping.
• We believe aerial video taping would be an
  acceptable part of the process of complying with
  the standards you discussed. Keep in mind,
  however, that actual compliance cannot be
  foretold. It is determined by our enforcement
  personnel, or those of State agencies, after
  inspecting and analyzing individual pipeline
  operations.

6
192.705 Transmission lines Patrolling.

• (a) Each operator shall have a patrol program to
  observe surface conditions on and adjacent to the
  transmission line right-of-way for indications of
  leaks, construction activity, and other factors
  affecting safety and operation.
• (b) The frequency of patrols is determined by
  the size of the line, the operating pressures,
  the class location, terrain, weather, and other
  relevant factors, but intervals between patrols
  may not be longer than prescribed in the
  following table
• (c) Methods of patrolling include walking,
  driving, flying or other appropriate means of
  traversing the right-of-way.

7
192.705 Transmission lines Patrolling. (Cont.)

• Class location
• of line
• 1,2
• 3
• 4

• Maximum interval between patrols
• At highway and At all other places
• railroad crossings
• 7 1/2 months 15 months
• 4 1/2 months 7 1/2 months
• 4 1/2 months 4 1/2 months

8
195.412 Inspection of rights-of-way and
crossings under navigable waters.

• (a) Each operator shall, at intervals not
  exceeding 3 weeks, but at least 26 times each
  calendar year, inspect the surface conditions on
  or adjacent to each pipeline right-of-way.
  Methods of inspection include walking, driving,
  flying or other appropriate mean of traversing
  the right-of-way.
• (b) Except for offshore pipelines, each operator
  shall, at intervals not exceeding 5 years,
  inspect each crossing under a navigable waterway
  to determine the condition of the crossing.

9
Section 195.412 Inspection of rights-of-way and
crossings under navigable waters.

• Section 195.412(a) requires an operator, at
  intervals not exceeding 3 weeks, but at least 26
  times each calendar year, to inspect the surface
  conditions on or adjacent to each pipeline
  right-of-way. Because some surface condition
  activities that affect the safety and operation
  of pipelines are more visible from aerial patrols
  than from walking or driving the right-of-way,
  RSPA proposed that the section be changed to
  clarify that aerial patrols are an optional
  method of compliance. No comments were received
  regarding the change and the THLPSSC voted 10 to
  0 in favor of the change (5 members did not
  vote). Accordingly, the change to 195.412(a) is
  adopted as proposed.

10

• 192.901 Subpart O- Pipeline Integrity
  Management

11

• (a) General requirements. An operator must take
  additional measures beyond those already required
  by Part 192 to prevent a pipeline failure and to
  mitigate the consequences of a pipeline failure
  in a high consequence area. An operator must base
  the additional measures on the threats the
  operator has identified to each pipeline segment.
  (See 192.917) An operator must conduct, in
  accordance with one of the risk assessment
  approaches in ASME/ANSI B31.8S (ibr, see
  192.7), section 5, a risk analysis of its
  pipeline to identify additional measures to
  protect the high consequence area and enhance
  public safety. Such additional measures include,
  but are not limited to, installing Automatic
  Shut-off Valves or Remote Control Valves,
  installing computerized monitoring and leak
  detection systems, replacing pipe segments with
  pipe of heavier wall thickness, providing
  additional training to personnel on response
  procedures, conducting drills with local
  emergency responders and implementing additional
  inspection and maintenance programs.

12
192.923 How is direct assessment used and for
what threats?

• (a) General. An operator may use direct
  assessment either as a primary assessment method
  or as a supplement to the other assessment
  methods allowed under this subpart. An operator
  may only use direct assessment as the primary
  assessment method to address the identified
  threats of external corrosion (ECDA), internal
  corrosion (ICDA), and stress corrosion cracking
  (SCCDA).
• (b) Primary method. An operator using direct
  assessment as a primary assessment method must
  have a plan that complies with the requirements
  in--
• (1) ASME/ANSI B31.8S (ibr, see 192.7), section
  6.4 NACE RP0502-2002 (ibr, see 192.7) and
  192.925 if addressing external corrosion (ECDA).
• (2) ASME/ANSI B31.8S, section 6.4 and appendix
  B2, and 192.927 if addressing internal
  corrosion (ICDA).
• (3) ASME/ANSI B31.8S, appendix A3, and 192.929
  if addressing stress corrosion cracking (SCCDA).
• (c) Supplemental method. An operator using
  direct assessment as a supplemental assessment
  method for any applicable threat must have a plan
  that follows the requirements for confirmatory
  direct assessment in 192.931.

13
192.919 What must be in the baseline
assessment plan?

• An operator must include each of the following
  elements in its written baseline assessment plan
• (a) Identification of the potential threats to
  each covered pipeline segment and the information
  supporting the threat identification. (See
  192.917.)
• (b) The methods selected to assess the integrity
  of the line pipe, including an explanation of why
  the assessment method was selected to address the
  identified threats to each covered segment. The
  integrity assessment method an operator uses must
  be based on the threats identified to the covered
  segment. (See 192.917.) More than one method
  may be required to address all the threats to the
  covered pipeline segment
• (c) A schedule for completing the integrity
  assessment of all covered segments, including
  risk factors considered in establishing the
  assessment schedule
• (d) If applicable, a direct assessment plan that
  meets the requirements of 192.923, and
  depending on the threat to be addressed, of
  192.925, 192.927, or 192.929 and
• (e) A procedure to ensure that the baseline
  assessment is being conducted in a manner that
  minimizes environmental and safety risks.

14

• 192.935 What additional preventive and
  mitigative measures must an operator take to
  protect the high consequence area?

15

• 195.452 Pipeline integrity management in high
• consequence areas.

16

• Thank you for your recent letter addressed to the
  office of Congressional Affairs on behalf of your
  constituent, Mr. Roy Farrow of Troy, Illinois.
  Your letter has been referred to the Research and
  Special Programs Administration (RSPA) for a
  reply. RSPA is the agency within the Department
  of Transportation responsible for regulating the
  safety of gas and hazardous liquid pipelines.
• Mr. Farrow has concerns regarding the clearing of
  pipeline rights-of-way. The Department's
  Pipeline Safety Regulations (49 CFR - 192.705 and
  195.412) require pipeline operators to inspect
  the surface condition of their rights-of-way for
  leaks and activities that could affect pipeline
  safety. Since the regulations do not specify the
  means by which inspections are to be carried out,
  operators may use either aerial or ground
  patrols.
• The regulations do not require that trees be
  removed or that rights-of-way be inspected from
  the air. It is the position of the Department
  that, if visual aerial inspections are used by
  the operator to meet the requirements of the
  regulations, the rights-of-way must be kept clear
  of brush and trees. Normally, this is a matter
  subject to negotiation in the rights-of-way
  agreement between the pipeline companies and the
  landowners involved.

17

• Thank you for your letter to David Marks, Deputy
  Assistant Secretary for Congressional Affairs,
• concerning negotiations between the East Goshen
  Conservancy Board and the Duke Energy
• Corporation over Duke Energy's plan to cut trees
  on its pipeline easement in East Goshen Township.
  
• Your letter has been referred to the Research and
  Special Programs Administration(RSPA) for
• response. RSPA is responsible for administering
  the Federal pipeline safety program.
• As stated in the incoming correspondence, Duke
  Energy plans to cut down trees to facilitate
  routine
• inspection of its easement by aerial patrol. It
  also wants to remove trees to make it easier for
  large
• equipment to gain access to the easement for
  normal maintenance and emergency response.
• Pipeline operated by Duke Energy are subject to
  the safety regulations of the Department of
• Transportation. These regulations require
  pipeline operators to patrol their easements for
• signs of leaks and construction activity.
  Although it is not a federal requirement to keep
  the right-of
• way is clear. However, federal regulations do
  not give operators a right to cut down trees on
  their
• pipeline easements. An operator's authority to
  cut down trees is subject to private agreements
  with
• landowners and to any local land use controls.

18

• You stated that Buckeye Pipe Line Company plans
  to remove some large trees on your property, and
  that Buckeye maintained that cutting the trees
  was necessary to comply with a Federal regulation
  so that the right-of-way can be better seen from
  the air.
• The Federal safety regulations governing liquid
  pipelines are 49 CFR Part. Judging from your
  letter, the applicable section of Part 195 is
  section 195.412 "Inspection of right-of-way and
  crossings under navigable waters" which states in
  subsection (a) "Each carrier shall, at intervals
  not exceeding two weeks, inspect the surface
  conditions on or adjacent to each pipeline
  right-of-way." Please note that this regulation
  does not require that trees be removed or that
  the right-of-way be inspected from the air.
  Therefore, the growth of trees on pipeline
  rights-of-way is not covered by the Federal
  regulations. It normally is a matter subject to
  negotiation in the right-of-way agreement between
  the pipeline companies and any landowners
  involved.

19

• I am responding to your request for consideration
  of the pipeline right-of-way matter involving
  landowners, Byron L. Brown and Juanita M. Brown.
  While we are sympathetic to any disagreement
  concerning the rights of landowners in relation
  to those of easement owners, the solution is
  largely a matter of state and local law.
• In regard to the landowners' specific concerns,
  the Department of Transportation's Office of
  Pipeline Safety (OPS) has looked into this matter
  and advised me that Exxon has three crude oil
  pipelines crossing the Browns' property and that
  the trees on the easement have been cut down, but
  not fully removed from the property. The federal
  pipeline safety standards require all operators,
  to "...inspect the surface conditions on or
  adjacent to each pipeline right-of-way." The
  purpose of these inspections is to locate any
  pipeline leaks and to detect excavation activity
  which could affect the safe operation of the
  pipeline. The federal standards allow operators
  to choose the manner of inspection. Exxon, as
  have most operators, has chosen air surveillance.
  Thus, it is necessary to observe the ground in
  the vicinity of the pipeline from the air. OPS
  does not require that the surveillance be by air
  or that any specific width be clear-cut, only
  that the method of surveillance chosen and its
  implementation allow the surface condition to be
  adequately surveyed. Exxon has advised OPS that,
  due to the number of miles of pipeline in their
  system, air patrol is the most economical method
  available to meet the federal requirement for
  inspection of rights-of-way.
• In addition to the patrolling requirements,
  federal rules require that Exxon must maintain
  and repair its pipelines at all times to protect
  the public safety. Exxon advised OPS that the
  tree roots here may threaten the integrity of its
  pipelines. They believe, and we agree, that tree
  roots can damage pipe coating and diminish the
  effectiveness of the corrosion control system,
  which is required for safety by federal law.

20

• Mr. Farrow has concerns regarding the clearing of
  pipeline rights-of-way. The Department's
  Pipeline Safety Regulations (49 CFR - 192.705 and
  195.412) require pipeline operators to inspect
  the surface condition of their rights-of-way for
  leaks and activities that could affect pipeline
  safety. Since the regulations do not specify the
  means by which inspections are to be carried out,
  operators may use either aerial or ground
  patrols.
• The regulations do not require that trees be
  removed or that rights-of-way be inspected from
  the air. It is the position of the Department
  that, if visual aerial inspections are used by
  the operator to meet the requirements of the
  regulations, the rights-of-way must be kept clear
  of brush and trees. Normally, this is a matter
  subject to negotiation in the rights-of-way
  agreement between the pipeline companies and the
  landowners involved.

21

• This responds to your petition P-45 dated January
  26, 1991, requesting the revision of 49 CFR
  195.412(a) to prohibit aerial inspections of
  pipeline rights-of-way in areas with population
  densities greater than 1000 people per square
  mile. You feel that low altitude flights at the
  required inspection frequency in such populated
  areas are ineffectual and present noise and other
  dangers of their own to public safety.
• Section 195.412(a) of the Hazardous Liquid
  Pipeline Safety Regulations states "Each
  operator shall, at intervals not exceeding 3
  weeks, but at least 26 times each calendar year,
  inspect the surface conditions on or adjacent to
  each right-of-way." This standard permits the
  pipeline operator to select an appropriate method
  of implementation.
• The use of airplanes and helicopters to perform
  these inspections complies with the regulation.
  Aerial inspections are an established industry
  practice and we consider such inspections to be
  an effectual way to disclose excavation
  activities on either side of the right-of-way
  that occasionally extend to the pipelines within
  the right-of-way. Checking for excavation
  activities is an important part of the
  inspection, because excavation activities, or
  "dig-ins," are the leading cause of damage to
  underground pipelines.

22

• Duke Energy may want to remove the trees to
  minimize the possibility that tree roots will
  damage the pipeline or pipeline coating. It may
  also want to remove the trees to facilitate
  routine patrolling of the easement.
• Pipelines operated by Duke Energy are subject to
  the safety regulations of Title 49 CFR Parts
  190-199 (enclosed). These regulations require
  operators to patrol their pipeline easements for
  signs of leaks and construction activity.
  However, the regulations do not require operators
  to keep their easements free of trees to make
  patrolling easier or to minimize the possibility
  of damage by tree roots, nor do the regulations
  give pipeline operators a right to remove trees
  on their pipeline easements. The authority of an
  operator to remove trees is subject to private
  agreements with landowners and to any local land
  use controls. Although, aerial surveillance is
  usually the most practical method of patrolling,
  in areas where an easement is concealed by trees
  or large bushes, a pipeline operator may observe
  conditions on the easement by walking or driving
  along the easement.

23
Questions ???Thank You!!

• harold.winnie_at_dot.gov
• 816-329-3836