Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 52511

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

49 CFR Part 195

[Docket No. PS–117; Amdt. 195–57A]

RIN 2137–AC87

Low-Stress Hazardous Liquid

Pipelines Serving Plants and Terminals

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs

Administration (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

SUMMARY: This action withdraws the

direct final rule that excluded from

RSPA’s safety standards for hazardous

liquid pipelines low-stress pipelines

regulated by the U.S. Coast Guard and

low-stress pipelines less than 1 mile

long that serve certain plants and

transportation terminals without

crossing an offshore area or a waterway

currently used for commercial

navigation. (62 FR 31364, June 9, 1997.)

Applicable procedural rules require

withdrawal because an interested

person submitted an adverse comment

on the direct final rule. RSPA’s stay of

enforcement of the safety standards

against these pipelines will remain in

effect until the matter is resolved

through further rulemaking.

DATES: The direct final rule published at

62 FR 31364 is withdrawn on October

7, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

L. M. Furrow, (202)366–4559, regarding

the subject matter of this notice. Contact

the Dockets Unit, (202) 366–5046, for

copies of this document or other

material in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In

response to increased environmental

awareness, critical accidents involving

low-stress pipelines, and Congressional

direction, RSPA extended its hazardous

liquid pipeline safety standards (49 CFR

Part 195) to cover certain low-stress

pipelines of higher risk (Docket No. PS–

117; 59 FR 35465; July 12, 1994). The

term ‘‘low-stress pipeline’’ means a

hazardous liquid pipeline that is

operated in its entirety at a stress level

of 20 percent or less of the specified

minimum yield strength of the line pipe

(§ 195.2). Except for onshore rural

gathering lines and gravity-powered

lines, the following categories of lowstress pipelines were brought under the

regulations: pipelines that transport

highly volatile liquids, pipelines located

onshore and outside rural areas,

pipelines located offshore, and

pipelines located in waterways that are

currently used for commercial

navigation (§ 195.1(b)(3)). Because the

rulemaking record showed that many

low-stress pipelines probably were not

operated and maintained consistent

with Part 195 requirements, operators

were allowed to delay compliance of

their existing lines until July 12, 1996,

(§ 195.1(c)).

The largest proportion of low-stress

pipelines brought under Part 195

consisted of interfacility transfer lines

(about two-thirds of the pipelines and

one-third of the overall mileage). The

remainder included trunk lines and

certain urban gathering lines.

Interfacility transfer lines move

hazardous liquids locally between

facilities such as truck, rail, and vessel

transportation terminals, manufacturing

plants, petrochemical plants, and oil

refineries, or between these facilities

and associated storage or long-distance

pipeline transportation. The lines

usually are short, averaging about a mile

in length.

Interfacility transfer lines are also

impacted by the Process Safety

Management regulations of the

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA) (29 CFR

1910.119). These regulations, which

involve hazard analysis and control,

operating and maintenance procedures,

and personnel training, are intended to

reduce the risk of fires and explosions

caused by the escape of hazardous

chemicals from facility processes. In

addition, transfer lines between vessels

and marine transportation-related

facilities are subject to safety regulations

of the U.S. Coast Guard (33 CFR Parts

154 and 156).

We considered the costs and potential

confusion of this regulatory overlap

with Part 195 as well as information that

showed that bringing interfacility

transfer lines into full compliance with

Part 195 would be difficult for many

operators. Weighing these problems

against the need for risk reduction, we

decided that the potential benefits of

complying with Part 195 do not justify

the effort if the line is short and does not

cross an offshore area or a commercially

navigable waterway, or if the line is

regulated by the Coast Guard.

Consequently, we announced a stay of

enforcement of Part 195 against certain

interfacility transfer lines (61 FR 24245;

May 14, 1996). The stay applies to lowstress pipelines that are regulated by the

Coast Guard or that extend less than 1

mile outside plant or terminal grounds

without crossing an offshore area or any

waterway currently used for commercial

navigation. We intend to keep the stay

in effect until modified or until we

finally revise the Part 195 regulations to

eliminate the need for the stay.

Following publication of the stay of

enforcement, we issued a direct final

rule to amend Part 195 to comport with

the stay (62 FR 31364; June 9, 1997).

This direct final rule revised

§ 195.1(b)(3) to exclude from Part 195

those low-stress interfacility transfer

lines that were covered by the stay,

while continuing to exclude other lowstress pipelines that were previously

excluded.

The procedures governing issuance of

direct final rules are in 49 CFR 190.339.

These procedures provide for public

notice and opportunity for comment

subsequent to publication of a direct

final rule. They also provide that if an

adverse comment or notice of intent to

file an adverse comment is received,

RSPA will issue a timely notice in the

Federal Register to confirm that fact and

withdraw the direct final rule in whole

or in part. Under the procedures, RSPA

may then incorporate the adverse

comment into a subsequent direct final

rule or may publish a notice of proposed

rulemaking.

Four persons submitted comments on

the direct final rule: American

Petroleum Institute (API), California

Department of Fish and Game (CDF&G),

California Independent Petroleum

Association (CIPA), and Western States

Petroleum Association (WSPA). API

made an editorial comment, while CIPA

and WSPA argued that the direct final

rule should be expanded to also exclude

from Part 195 short low-stress pipelines

serving production/shipping facilities in

urban areas.

However, CDF&G opposed the direct

final rule. It argued, first, that the Coast

Guard’s regulations are not an adequate

substitute for RSPA’s because of weak

pressure testing requirements and the

absence of cathodic protection

requirements to guard against corrosion.

Secondly, it said the exclusion of short

plant and terminal transfer lines should

apply only if a discharge would not

impact marine waters of the United

States. In contrast, the direct final rule

excluded these lines if they did not

cross offshore or a commercially

navigable waterway.

Because of the adverse comment from

CDF&G, we are withdrawing the direct

final rule. We intend to follow up this

action with a notice of proposed

rulemaking that will propose to amend

the application of Part 195 in a way

similar to the direct final rule, but by

taking into account the comments we

received on it.
52512 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 3,

1997.

Kelley S. Coyner,

Acting Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–26694 Filed 10–7–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P