[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 128 (Monday, July 6, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36373-36376]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17721]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programs Administration
49 CFR Part 195
[Docket No. RSPA-97-2362; Amdt. 195-62]
RIN 2137--AD05
Pipeline Safety: Incorporation by Reference of Industry Standard
on Leak Detection
AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule adopts as a referenced document an industry
publication for pipeline leak detection, API 1130, ``Computational
Pipeline Monitoring,'' published by the American Petroleum Institute
(API). This rule requires that an operator of a hazardous liquid
pipeline use API 1130 in conjunction with other information, in
designing, evaluating, operating, maintaining, and testing its
software-based leak detection system. The use of this document will
significantly advance the acceptance of leak detection technology on
hazardous liquid pipelines. However, this rule does not require
operators to install such systems.
DATES: This final rule takes effect July 6, 1999.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lloyd W. Ulrich, telephone: (202) 366-
4556, FAX: (202) 366-4566, e-mail: lloyd.ulrich@rspa.dot.gov regarding
the subject matter of this final rule, or Dockets Unit, (202) 366-4453,
for copies of this final rule or other material in the docket. Further
information can be obtained by accessing OPS' Internet Home Page at:
ops.dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background on Requiring Leak Detection Equipment
A. Congressional Mandate To Issue Regulations
Congress, in section 212 of the Pipeline Safety Act of 1992
(codified at 49 U.S.C. 60102(j)), required the Secretary of
Transportation, by October 24, 1994, to survey and assess the
effectiveness of emergency flow restricting devices (EFRDs) and other
procedures, systems, and equipment used to detect and locate hazardous
liquid pipeline ruptures and minimize product releases from hazardous
liquid pipeline facilities. Congress further mandated that the
Secretary issue regulations two years after completing the survey and
assessment (no later than October 24, 1996). These regulations would
prescribe the circumstances under which hazardous liquid pipeline
operators would use EFRDs or other procedures, systems, and equipment
used to detect and locate pipeline ruptures and minimize product
releases from pipeline facilities. The Secretary delegated this
authority to the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA).
B. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Volpe Center Report and
Public Workshop
RSPA used several means to gather information on EFRDs and leak
detection equipment. We issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRM) (59 FR 2802, Jan. 19, 1994) to solicit information primarily
from hazardous liquid pipeline operators about operational data and
costs related to EFRDs and about the performance of leak detection
systems to detect and locate hazardous liquid pipeline ruptures and
minimize product release. The ANPRM also sought information to help
determine which critical pipeline locations should be protected from
product releases. Commenters provided limited usable data and generally
opposed requiring leak detection equipment and EFRDs.
We contracted with the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
(Volpe Center) to conduct a research study on SCADA 1
systems, including leak detection systems. Its report, ``Remote Control
Spill Reduction Technology: A Survey and Analysis of Applications for
Liquid Pipeline Systems'' (September 29, 1996), found that because of
the pipeline industry's diversity, each system used for leak detection
must be custom configured for a particular pipeline system, that SCADA
and leak detection systems were dependent on the sophistication of the
host computer and how rapidly and diverse remote field data can be
collected, and that operators have invested in SCADA systems, but have
invested much less in software-based leak detection systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SCADA is an acronym for Supervisory Control and Data
Acquisition. SCADA systems utilize computer technology to
continuously gather data (e.g., pressure, temperature, and delivery
flow rates) from remote locations on the pipeline. Dispatchers use
SCADA systems to assist in day-to-day operating decisions on the
pipeline. SCADA systems can also provide input for real-time models
of the pipeline operation. Such models compare current operating
conditions with calculated data values. A deviation may indicate the
possibility of a leak.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RSPA also held a public workshop on October 19, 1995, to obtain
more data on EFRDs and leak detection systems. Participants confirmed
the Volpe Center report's finding that each leak detection system is
unique to the pipeline on which it is installed. Discussions included
operational and economic problems with leak detection systems, as well
as their operational, economic and environmental benefits.
Detailed discussion of the ANPRM, Volpe Center report, and workshop
can be found at 62 FR 56141; October 29, 1997.
C. Development of API 1130
In 1994, the API formed a task force to develop a document on
computational pipeline monitoring (CPM). The task force produced API
1130, entitled ``Computational Pipeline Monitoring,'' which addressed
the use of software-based leak detection equipment. API 1130 defines
computational pipeline monitoring as ``an algorithmic monitoring tool
that allows the pipeline controller to respond to a pipeline operating
anomaly which may be indicative of a commodity release.'' The
document's stated purpose is to assist the pipeline operator in
selecting, implementing, testing, and operating a CPM system, and to
help to identify the complexities, limitations, and other implications
of detecting anomalies on liquid pipelines using CPM systems.
RSPA and the Volpe Center staff monitored the task force's work.
Minutes of the task force meetings, and copies of final drafts of API
1130, are available in Docket No. PS-133.
D. Definition of Areas Unusually Sensitive to Environmental Damage
Congress required that in prescribing standards, RSPA identify the
circumstances where EFRDs and other equipment must be installed. RSPA's
current policy is to base regulations on risk assessment. We believe
that a
[[Page 36374]]
primary high risk circumstance would be where a pipeline is located in
an environmentally sensitive area.
RSPA has been conducting public workshops since 1995 to identify a
subset of environmentally sensitive areas, areas unusually sensitive to
environmental damage, or USAs. Because of this ongoing regulatory
effort to define USAs and the definition's relevance to locating EFRDs,
RSPA has decided to wait before proposing a rule prescribing where leak
detection systems would be required.
E. First Step
Although RSPA has delayed proposing the circumstances where EFRDs
and other equipment must be installed on hazardous liquid pipeline
systems until it has an USA definition, RSPA did not want to delay
addressing the safety and environmental advantages of using software-
based leak detection technology to reduce releases from pipeline
ruptures.
Pipeline safety regulations do not require hazardous liquid
pipeline operators to meet any leak detection system performance
standards. Thus, as a first step in RSPA's statutory requirement to
issue regulations prescribing where hazardous liquid pipeline operators
would use EFRDs or other leak detection systems, RSPA considered
adopting API 1130. RSPA would adopt API 1130 and require operators to
use it in operating, maintaining, and testing their existing software-
based leak detection systems and in designing and installing new
software-based leak detection systems or replacing components of
existing systems. RSPA considered this action because--
(1) We monitored the development of API 1130 and its development is
well documented in Docket No. PS-133. The API task force members who
developed API 1130 are experts in the pipeline industry, well versed in
leak detection systems.
(2) API 1130 is a comprehensive document that advances safety by
providing for more rapid detection of ruptures and response to those
ruptures, limiting releases of hazardous liquids.
(3) Adopting API 1130 complies with the spirit of the President's
initiative to reduce and simplify regulations by adopting industry-
developed standards. Its adoption would not be controversial because
the pipeline industry, the primary user, developed the publication.
F. Role of the Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Standards
Committee (THLPSSC)
We proposed adopting API 1130 as a referenced document in the
pipeline safety regulations to the THLPSSC at its meeting on November
6, 1996. The THLPSSC is a 15-member Congressionally mandated advisory
committee (49 U.S.C. 60115) responsible for reviewing proposed pipeline
safety standards for technical feasibility, reasonableness, and
practicability. The THLPSSC Chairperson appointed a three-person
subcommittee to work with RSPA to provide technical expertise on the
feasibility of adopting API 1130. The subcommittee submitted to the
THLPSSC Chairperson several recommendations, which THLPSSC accepted:
(1) API 1130 in its entirety should be referenced in the 49 CFR
Part 195 regulations.
(2) The operations, maintenance, and testing portions of API 1130
should apply to all existing and newly-installed CPM systems, and API
1130 in its entirety should apply to all newly installed CPM systems
and replacement sections of existing CPM systems.
(3) Compliance with API 1130 should be within twelve months of
incorporation of the document into the regulations.
(4) The document should apply only to single phase liquid pipelines
(see Section 1.3 of API 1130, which limits the document's application
to single phase liquid pipelines).
(5) The preamble to the draft and final rule should state that
referencing API 1130 is a first step in meeting the requirements of 49
U.S.C. 60102(j), and is not intended to delay issuing additional
requirements or actions.
II. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
A. Proposal
RSPA published an NPRM on October 29, 1997 (62 FR 56141) proposing
to incorporate API 1130 into the regulations as a referenced document.
The NPRM incorporated THLPSSC's recommendations. The rule proposed
requiring an operator of a hazardous liquid pipeline to comply with API
1130 in designing, operating, maintaining, and testing the operator's
software-based leak detection system. The proposed rule did not require
an operator to install a software-based leak detection system, but
proposed that whenever such a leak detection system is installed or a
component replaced, API 1130 would have to be followed. Similarly, each
existing software-based leak detection system would have to comply with
the operating, maintenance, testing, and training provisions of API
1130.
To be consistent with API 1130's scope limitations (Section 1.3),
the NPRM limited API 1130's applicability to single-phase liquid
pipelines. Pipelines transporting both gas and liquid simultaneously,
called dual phase pipelines, are prevalent in offshore operations. A
pipeline transports gas and liquid to onshore facilities, where it is
more economical to separate the gas and liquid for further transport.
Designing a leak detection system for such a pipeline is extremely
complex because of the different physical and chemical characteristics
of gases and liquids.
The NPRM's comment period closed on December 29, 1997.
B. Discussion of the Comments
Three comments were filed in the docket: two from hazardous liquid
operators and one from API.
One operator asked three questions. The first dealt with a
``Special Note'' in API 1130 that API documents are reviewed, revised,
reaffirmed, or withdrawn at least every five years. The commenter asked
how incorporating API 1130 would affect the hazardous liquid pipeline
safety regulations should API not reaffirm the document, and the
document was no longer available. We review and revise the regulations
periodically to update the references to industry and other voluntary
standards. In this rule, we are incorporating the current version of
API 1130. An operator will have to comply with this version of the
document until we revise the rule. Whatever API does with API 1130 in
the future will not affect an operator's compliance with the version we
are incorporating.
The second question concerned the use of CPM systems not described
in section 4.1.2 of API 1130. Section 4.1.2 describes seven CPM
systems: line balance, volume balance, modified volume balance, real
time transient mode, pressure/flow monitoring, acoustic/negative
pressure wave, and statistical analysis. The commenter asked if CPM
systems not described could be used.
API 1130 lists and describes the seven CPM systems that are used by
the pipeline industry today. Section 4.1.2 does not limit the use of
CPM systems to only those described. Our intent in referencing API 1130
is to include any CPM system, whether or not described in the document,
as long as the system meets the requirements of API 1130.
[[Page 36375]]
The third question concerned how we would enforce compliance with
API 1130. Enforcement strategies are not included in the safety
standards, but rather are developed by the RSPA enforcement staff. Each
operator who has installed a CPM system will have to demonstrate that
it is complying with the requirements in API 1130, as it does with any
pipeline safety regulation.
The second operator suggested that the effective date for complying
with API 1130 should be 24 months instead of the proposed 12 months.
RSPA believes that 12 months is sufficient compliance time for at least
three reasons. First, the operator is not required to install a CPM
system, just to follow API 1130 if one is installed. Second, our
conversations with API indicate that the vast majority of operators who
use CPM systems have already adopted the practices embodied in the
document. Third, a 12-month compliance timetable follows THLPSSC's
recommendation.
API commented on the proposed rule's reference to the CPM selection
criteria in section 4.2. API stated that the NPRM can be interpreted as
requiring compliance with all the listed criteria in Section 4.2.
However, the introduction to Section 4.2 makes clear that no system
meets all the criteria. RSPA has revised Sec. 195.134 in the final rule
to clarify that all of the selection criteria do not have to be met.
In addition, we have revised the definition for Computation
Pipeline Monitoring to clarify that a CPM system alerts the pipeline
dispatcher of a possible operating anomaly rather than allows the
dispatcher to respond to an operating anomaly. This revision better
describes the function of the monitoring tool. Also, Sec. 195.134 has
been revised by eliminating the superfluous term ``that will be
installed'' referring to new CPM systems.
C. Advisory Committee Review
As mentioned previously, the THLPSSC accepted the subcommittee's
recommendation to reference API 1130 in 49 CFR part 195. The NPRM was
discussed at the THLPSSC meeting in Houston, Texas, on November 18,
1997. The eight members present voted unanimously to adopt API 1130 as
proposed in the NPRM.
III. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This rule is not considered a significant action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, was not reviewed by OMB. It is
not considered significant under the Department of Transportation
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, Feb. 26, 1979).
As THLPSSC recommended, this rule adopts an industry document, API
1130. Our adopting API 1130 should result in leak detection systems
that allow for faster leak detection, resulting in reduced commodity
loss, lower short-term cleanup costs from releases, and lower long-term
remediation costs. The rule does not require an operator to install a
CPM if the operator does not already have one. It only requires that an
operator with such a system follow API 1130. API 1130 represents good
industry practices. Our conversations with API officials confirm that
the vast majority of the industry that uses CPM already has adopted
these practices.
In the NPRM, RSPA solicited information on any costs to industry of
referencing API 1130. No one submitted any information on costs in
response to this request. Therefore, RSPA believes that the cost of
this regulation will be minimal and that a regulatory evaluation is not
necessary.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The rule does not mandate the use of CPM but simply adopts the
practices already instituted and developed by industry. Most operators,
large, medium and small, with such systems already comply with these
requirements and will not incur additional costs. Therefore, based on
the facts available, I certify pursuant to Section 605 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605) that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
C. Federalism Assessment
The rulemaking action would not have substantial direct effects on
states, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive
Order 12612 (52 FR 41685, Oct. 30, 1987), RSPA has determined that this
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
D. Unfunded Mandates
This rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does not result in costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector, and is the least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objective of the rule.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
There are minimal record keeping requirements included in API 1130.
This rule does not require an operator to have a CPM. The industry
developed API 1130; the vast majority of the industry that uses CPM
already has adopted the practices in API 1130. Because the record
keeping requirements represent the usual and customary practices of the
industry, there is minimal paperwork burden on the public.
Nevertheless, RSPA has prepared a paperwork analysis and, on April 1,
1998 submitted it to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review. The estimated annual information collection burden for the
entire industry is estimated to be only 100 hours per year.
Comments on the paperwork burden have been solicited on: (a) The
need for the proposed collection of information for the proper
performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (c) ways to enhance the quality utility and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of
collection of information on those who respond, including the use of
appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques.
No comments were submitted in response to the request for comment.
OMB approved the information collection and assigned the information
collection control number 2137-0598, which is approved through April
30, 2001. Federal agencies are required to publish the OMB control
number for information collections in the Federal Register. Failure to
publish the information collection control number would mean that
respondents would not be required to respond to the information
collection.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 195
Ammonia, Carbon dioxide, Petroleum, Pipeline safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, RSPA amends 49 CFR part 195 as
follows:
PART 195--TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS LIQUIDS BY PIPELINE
1. The authority citation for Part 195 continues to read as
follows:
[[Page 36376]]
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60109, 60118;
and 49 CFR 1.53.
Subpart A--General
2. Section 195.2 is amended by adding the definition for
Computational Pipeline Monitoring to read as follows:
Sec. 195.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Computation Pipeline Monitoring (CPM) means a software-based
monitoring tool that alerts the pipeline dispatcher of a possible
pipeline operating anomaly that may be indicative of a commodity
release.
* * * * *
3. Section 195.3 is amended by redesignating paragraphs (c)(2)(i)
through (c)(2)(iii), as paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) through (c)(2)(iv), and
adding a new paragraph (c)(2)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 195.3 Matter incorporated by reference.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) API 1130 ``Computational Pipeline Monitoring'' (1st Edition,
1995).
* * * * *
Subpart C--Design Requirements
4. Section 195.134 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 195.134 CPM leak detection.
This section applies to each hazardous liquid pipeline transporting
liquid in single phase (without gas in the liquid). On such systems,
each new computational pipeline monitoring (CPM) leak detection system
and each replaced component of an existing CPM system must comply with
section 4.2 of API 1130 in its design and with any other design
criteria addressed in API 1130 for components of the CPM leak detection
system.
Subpart F--Operation and Maintenance
5. Section 195.444 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 195.444 CPM leak detection.
Each computational pipeline monitoring (CPM) leak detection system
installed on a hazardous liquid pipeline transporting liquid in single
phase (without gas in the liquid) must comply with API 1130 in
operating, maintaining, testing, record keeping, and dispatcher
training of the system.
Issued in Washington, DC on June 29, 1998.
Kelley S. Coyner,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-17721 Filed 7-2-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
