PHMSA/DOT Pipeline Permitting

[MidstreamEgr]

I have a client looking at expanding an existing terminal (non-DOT) with pipeline in/out. I believe that, given the fact that it will be a DOT-regulated terminal once they start piping into and out of it, any new work needs to be DOT-compliant and would require full design and drawings. I ask as they basically said they will have their contractor handle all the in-terminal piping and electrical, and only need drawings for the pipeline. I'm concerned they may get bitten by this (from a compliance standpoint, assuming the resulting construction itself is fine), but I can't find anything discussing if that is the case.

Any feedback on essentially what regulatory requirements are for "minimum design documentation" required?

 

[pmover]

what is the fluid being transported?

see:

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title49/49cfrv3_02.tpl

see attached doc for further assistance. good luck!
-pmover

 

[MidstreamEgr]

It's primarily crude and other unrefined petros. It's definitely regulated under PHMSA/OPS. But I can't locate in CFR where there is a review process with PHMSA, or a requirement for documentation/drawings. At least in CFR 195, it talked about that the pipeline must be designed to X, but not how thats quantified and checked by regulatory authority (if it is). Maybe they don't actually regulate on the front end. I'm used to terminal design, where there's always an extended review period before construction of tanks, etc (fire dept, building permit, EPA, etc).

Basically, do they need drawings or specs per code (or a PE to sign/seal) or as long as they have "a design" that meets CFR 195, they're good. It might be on a napkin or in the contractors head, but it meets the physical characteristics of the design performance requirements...

 

[BigInch]

I'm not up on current tank regulations in the US, so all I can offer is that while the tanks certainly may have to meet other regulatory requirements, NFPA, EPA, they do not fall under the part 195 regulations, unless they are "breakout" tanks. Breakout tanks temporarily store products off the pipeline which will be reinjected into the pipeline for further transportation at some later time.

What would you be doing, if you knew that you could not fail?

 

[zdas04]

Whether piping comes under 92 CFR 195 or not is based on the population density in the vicinity of the piping. There are no DOT permits associated with this, just that if the pipe is jurisdictional it must have been built to the standards of the regulations and (seems like most importantly) all tests and inspections must be documented per 195. That is the piece that most often bits my clients on the butt. For jurisdictional pipe you have to keep inspection reports, mill reports, weld maps, x-rays, and static test reports and charts. No one archives all that crap for non-jurisdictional pipe.

One nasty little twist in this regulation is that if you add to a system without proper controls, the entire system becomes jurisdictional. For example, one of my clients had a 20 mile 6-inch gas line that was in farm country and there wasn't enough population anywhere along its length to trigger 195. Then a land owner subdivided his farm and built a hundred houses within 500 ft of the pipe over a couple of mile section. That brought in the whole 20 mile section and we were faced with digging up a bunch of pipe to re-run x-rays, new static test, etc since none of those records had survived commissioning in the 1980s. What we ended up doing was putting ESD valves at the property line on both ends of the property and only treating the 2 miles as jurisdictional. It was still an expensive pain with no real public benefit, but it was 1/10 the cost of doing the same thing over 20 miles.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.

 

[BigInch]

izdas, This is interesting. You said, "Whether piping comes under 92 CFR 195 or not is based on the population density in the vicinity of the piping. " It does in a way, as 195 does apply to non-rural areas. Or rather the exact quote is, "(195) Does not apply to rural areas"...except where such rural areas are located in inlets of the GOM. Paraphrased as, CFR 195 Does not apply to "(4) Transportation of petroleum in onshore gathering lines in rural areas except gathering lines in the inlets of the Gulf of Mexico subject to § 195.413;". (noting that it would apply to liquid lines that are not gathering lines). The subdivision to which you refer apparently made a gathering line that was no longer located in a area rural area. In any case I'm surprized that once classed as non-rural, they apparently allowed you to revert to rural status. I thought it was a case of, once any part was classified as non-rural and the system came under 195, it would remain under 195 for all downstream segments thereafter. Did I misunderstand, or is it that you could revert to non-covered status, if the area returns to rural classification. If true, It would also seem that we are talking only about gathering lines as well.

Back to Breakout Tanks,

195 Definitions,
Breakout tank means a tank used to (a) relieve surges in a hazardous liquid pipeline system or (b) receive and store hazardous liquid transported by a pipeline for reinjection and continued transportation by pipeline.

Not covering tanks used at terminals, transporting from pipeline mode to a non-pipeline mode, trucks, railroad, etc. are not included. See 195.1 b,8(ii)
Breakout tanks section 8, C.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2006-title49-vol3/xml/CFR-2006-title49-vol3-sec195-1.xml

195.132 Design and construction of aboveground breakout tanks.

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=322248

195.264 Impoundment, protection against entry, normal/emergency venting or pressure/vacuum relief for aboveground breakout tanks.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2006-title49-vol3/xml/CFR-2006-title49-vol3-part195-subpartD.xml

Terminals are not covered by 195, except for any "breakout" tanks and, of course, those portions of a covered "pipeline" that might be located therein.

What would you be doing, if you knew that you could not fail?

 

[zdas04]

"Reverting" is a bit different than the situation we had. We had a rural line that had been encroached upon in a specific 2 mile section. The attorneys said that we had a "reasonable time" to reassess the line's status and to make any changes necessary. Since we were starting our evaluation at the time the foundations of the new sub division was being laid out we got some brownie points for being proactive. The assessment of a couple of attorneys and several engineers was that as long as positive steps were taken (such as an ESD with the proper trips at the inlet and outlet of the area) it was acceptable in the code for the pipe flowing into the jurisdictional section and the pipe flowing out of the jurisdictional section to be non-jurisdictional.

The key element was the ESD valves (I wanted to use trunnion ball valves with a solenoid on the body bleed, but was overruled and two actuated trunnion ball valves with an automated vent between them were used). The DOT found our technique to be a best practice.

The part about the GOM didn't stick in my mind since this project was at least 3 states away from the nearest ocean.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.

 

[BigInch]

All this gets "checked" when the operator applies for an operating permit.

What would you be doing, if you knew that you could not fail?

 

[MidstreamEgr]

I appreciate everyone's input on this.

So my take is... there is no formal review prior to construction (except local or state jurisdiction for building, fire, stormwater, etc). The system (breakout tanks, terminal piping, pipeline, etc) must be built according to CFR 195, and that includes some design requirements. It must also be rigorously tested and MTRs maintained. And at the end DOT/PHMSA/OPS will request documentation of the system meeting the CFR - which could be drawings and specs or hand-calculations on a notepad, as well as test records, etc. Lastly, the OPS will ask for pipeline route for the NPMS system.

So they can have the contractor field route pipe, based on rough calculations to ensure it meets CFR for pressure. And then get documentation at the end to pretty it up for PHSMA. Sounds risky to me, but I guess if not paying for engineering is attractive at the outset, it's worth the risk!

 

[BigInch]

Terminal pipes and terminal tanks do not fall under 195. Only "pipeline" pipes and breakout tanks will fall into that. Pipeline pipes include esd valve and piping up to the backpressure control valve in the station which basically includes any pipe up to the last control valve, or manual valve that can or would be used to control pipeline outlet pressure in an emergency, assuming any further piping does not go to a pump station that is being used to push to another pipeline. Piping outside those bounds are "station" pipes and they don't fall under 195.

Station tanks that store crude and products for use within a refinery, within a power plant (for fuel storage), for loading trucks, or rail tank cars, farm tractors, airports or airplanes, are not breakout tanks and do not fall within 195, but certainly would fall under NFPA and local fire regulations, possibly state regulation of one sort or another, as well as EPA vapor emission regulations. As long as crudes, or products contained in a tank cannot be, or will not be (?) used for further pipeline transport, those tanks are station tanks ie. NOT part 195 coverage.

As far as I know, DOT does not inspect first, or during construction. The owner/operator will be required to certify that everything meets DOT/CFR requirements in the permit to operate process. This is as far as I know, which may not be very far, since, BE WARNED, I have not worked stateside since 1991. We should wait to see if anybody else can add something to that.

What would you be doing, if you knew that you could not fail?

 

[zdas04]

It hasn't changed much since 1991. There is no DOT pre-construction permitting (but everyone is expecting the new pipeline safety group to institute that any day). There is no post-construction reporting. There is RECORD KEEPING on everything from NDT to operator training to cathodic testing, but you don't have to submit it to them. If the DOT decides to audit you (randomly or for cause) then failure to have kept the records gets a touch expensive and you find yourself clearly on their radar forevermore.


David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.

 

[BigInch]

OK, it is the same as before. Yes, it seems that if they happen to catch you without the docs after an incident, not only the pipe stands a chance to be reamed.

What would you be doing, if you knew that you could not fail?