
Billing Code: 4910-60-P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
49 CFR Parts 191, 192, and 195
Docket Number RSPA-99-6132
[RIN 2137-AD42]
Pipeline Safety: Producer-operated Outer Continental Shelf Natural Gas
and Hazardous Liquid Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: This document proposes to implement a provision of the December 10, 1996,
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the
Department of Transportation (DOT) regarding safety regulations of Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS) natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines. This rule addresses producer-operated
natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines that cross into State waters without first connecting to
a transporting operator's facility on the OCS. This proposed rule would also address the
procedures by which producer operators could petition for approval to operate under PHMSA
regulations governing pipeline design, construction, operation, and maintenance.
DATES: Comments on the subject of this proposed rule must be received on or before
[INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL
REGISTER].
ADDRESSES: Comments should identify the docket number of this proposed rule, RSPA-99-6132, and be mailed to the Dockets Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW, Plaza 401, Washington, DC 20590-0001.You should submit the
original and one copy. Anyone who wants confirmation of receipt of their comments must
include a stamped, self-addressed postcard. The Dockets facility is open from 10:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays. Alternatively, you may submit
written comments to the docket electronically. To do so, log on to the Internet Web address
http://dms.dot.gov and click on "Help" for instructions
on electronic filing of comments. All written comments should identify the docket
and notice numbers which appear in the heading of this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: You may contact L.E. Herrick by telephone at (202)
366-5523, by fax at (202) 366 4566, by mail at U.S. Department of Transportation, PHMSA,
DPS-10, room 7128, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20590, or via e-mail to
le.herrick@rspa.dot.gov regarding the subject matter of this notice. For copies of this notice
or other material that is referenced herein you may contact the Dockets Facility by telephone at
(202) 366-5046 or at the addresses listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is complementary to the PHMSA Direct
Final Rule (DFR) that addressed OCS natural gas or hazardous liquid pipeline facilities located
upstream of the points at which operating responsibility for the pipeline facility transfers from a
producing operator to a transporting operator (November 19, 1997; 62 FR 61692 and March
16, 1998; 63 FR 12659) and to the DOI Minerals Management Service (MMS) rule,
"Producer Operated Pipelines that Cross Directly into State Waters," which was published in
the Federal Register on July 27, 2000 (65 FR 46092).
Background
In May 1996, MMS and PHMSA met with a joint industry workgroup, which was led by the
American Petroleum Institute. The workgroup proposed that the agencies rely upon individual
operators of natural gas and hazardous liquid production and transportation pipeline facilities to
identify the boundaries of their respective facilities. The MMS and PHMSA agreed with the
industry proposal and entered into an interagency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on
December 10, 1996. The MOU was published in a joint MMS-PHMSA Federal Register
Notice (February 14, 1997; 62 FR 7037-7039).
The MOU placed, to the greatest practical extent, OCS production pipelines under DOI
responsibility and OCS transportation pipelines under DOT responsibility. Therefore, PHMSA
has primary regulatory responsibility for transporter-operated pipelines and associated pumping
or compressor facilities on the OCS, while MMS has primary regulatory responsibility for
producer-operated facilities and pipelines. Producing operators are companies which are
engaged in the extraction and processing of hydrocarbons on the OCS. Transporting operators
are companies which are engaged in the transportation of those hydrocarbons from the OCS.
There are approximately 150 operators of producer pipelines and 75 operators of
transportation pipelines on the OCS.
The MOU established a regulatory boundary on the OCS at the point where operating
responsibility for the pipeline transfers from a producing operator to a transporting operator.
The MOU did not address the producer-operated pipelines that cross the Federal/State
boundary without a transfer on the OCS. However, the MOU provided the agencies with the
flexibility to address situations that do not correspond to the general definition of the regulatory
boundary.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to address regulatory questions regarding producer-operated pipeline facilities that cross the Federal/State boundary without first connecting to a
transporting operator's facility on the OCS and to establish a procedure whereby OCS
producing operators may petition to have their pipelines regulated by PHMSA. The rule would
amend 49 CFR Parts 191.1(b)(1), 192.1(b)(1) and 195.1(b)(5).
When we published the DFR to implement the December 1996 MOU on November 19, 1997
(62 FR 61692), we received comments from Chevron U.S.A. Production Company and
Chevron Pipe Line Company in which they observed that the proposed regulation did not
appear to allow OCS producer-operated pipelines to remain under DOT regulatory authority.
The commenters requested that provision be made to allow producers to continue to operate
under DOT regulations if approval is obtained from DOI.
This arose because the regulatory boundaries in the MOU and the DFR were described in
terms of specific points on OCS pipelines where operating responsibility transfers from a
producing operator to a connecting transporting operator. The producer-operated pipelines
that cross the Federal/State boundary into State waters without first connecting to a
transporter-operated facility were not affected. Nor were the producer lines that flow from
State waters to production platforms located on the OCS.
Regardless of the direction of flow, producer pipelines that cross the Federal/State boundary
are always subject to PHMSA regulation on the portions of the lines located in State waters.
However, it does not make operational sense to have a pipeline segment crossing the
Federal/State boundary subject to MMS regulations on the OCS side of the boundary and
PHMSA regulations on the State side of the boundary. We believe that a regulatory boundary
point is better defined in terms of a specific point that isolates one segment of a pipeline from
another. By contrast, the Federal/State geographic boundary does not allow the isolation of
facilities on each side of the boundary.
Therefore, for producer-operated pipeline facilities that cross into State waters without first
connecting to a transporting operator's facility on the OCS, we propose that pipeline segments
located upstream (generally seaward) of the last valve on the last production facility (excluding
pipeline risers and associated safety equipment) be exempted from compliance with 49 CFR
Parts 190-199.
Under this arrangement, producer-operated pipeline facilities upstream (generally seaward) of
the last valve on the last production facility on the OCS would be regulated under MMS
regulations. PHMSA would continue to inspect all upstream safety equipment (including valves,
over-pressure protection devices, cathodic protection equipment, and pigging devices) that
serve to protect the integrity of the PHMSA-regulated pipeline segments. This arrangement is
consistent with the general intent of the MOU. However, producer-operators whose lines do
not transfer operating responsibility on the OCS may petition PHMSA for a different regulatory
boundary.
An important principle of the industry agreement leading to the MOU is to allow the operators
to agree to the regulatory boundaries on their facilities. Therefore, producer pipeline operators
may petition PHMSA's Office of Pipeline Safety under 49 CFR 190.9 for approval to operate
under PHMSA regulations governing pipeline design, construction, operation, and maintenance.
In considering such petitions, the PHMSA Administrator, or designee, will consult with the MMS
and the affected parties.
This proposed rule would affect about 215 producer-operated pipelines that are being
regulated according to a now-superseded 1976 MOU between DOI and DOT. By exempting
the producer-operated pipelines from PHMSA regulation, this rule would reduce the overlapping
regulations in accordance with the MOU of December 10, 1996. The rulemaking would have
minimal economic impact on any of the affected operators.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. E.O. 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
DOT does not consider this action to be a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4,1993). Therefore, it was not forwarded to
the Office of Management and Budget. This proposed rule is not significant under DOT's
regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR
11034: February 26, 1979). A regulatory evaluation of this proposal was prepared and placed
in the docket of this action.
Benefits
Without the proposed rule, the pipeline operations of a large number of producers with
pipelines crossing directly into State waters could remain subject to overlapping regulations for
design, construction, operation, and maintenance. This includes about 35 producers in Gulf of
Mexico OCS waters and 10 producers operating in California OCS waters. This would be
contrary to the intent of the American Petroleum Institute and industry agreement and the MOU
to regulate producer-operated pipelines under DOI and transporter-operated pipelines under
DOT.
By implementing the proposed rule, PHMSA will bring these pipelines under the provisions of the
1996 MOU. This should serve to minimize confusion among operators concerning which
regulations they are expected to follow. We estimate that each OCS producer operator
spends on average one-half person year annually per OCS pipeline to comply with PHMSA
regulations. Assuming that a loaded wage for a person year in the pipeline industry is $50,000,
each company could realize a savings of $25,000 annually ($50,000 x 0.5 person-years =
$25,000). The annual savings to the entire industry could be as high as $1,125,000 ($25,000
x 45 operators = $1,125,000).
Costs
The administrative costs of the proposed rule are minimal. Paperwork costs would arise only in
cases when a producer pipeline operator decided to request that its pipeline continue to be
regulated as a PHMSA facility. We estimate that less than 10 producer pipeline operators will
request to remain under PHMSA regulation. We estimate that the time for developing each
request and submitting it to MMS and PHMSA will be about 40 hours. Based on 10 requests at
40 hours each, the total one-time burden of requesting to remain under PHMSA regulation will be
less than 400 hours. Based on $35 per hour, we estimate that the total administrative cost to
respondents is less than $14,000 ($1,400 per request) during the first year that the rule is
implemented. In the first year, nearly all producer pipeline operators would have decided
whether to automatically convert to MMS regulation or apply to remain under PHMSA
regulation. We anticipate that in following years, not more than two operators a year would
submit a request to change their regulatory status at a total cost of $2,800. However, for most
following years it is highly unlikely that any request would be made as a result of the proposed
rule.
The proposed rule does not have a significant economic effect (less than $100 million);
therefore, PHMSA does not consider it to be a major rule. We do not expect there to be any
increases in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local
governments, agencies, or geographic regions to result from implementing the proposed rule.
Any indirect effects on costs or prices are anticipated to be negligible.
This proposed rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action
taken or planned by another agency; materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs; or raise novel legal or policy issues.
The proposed rule will not have any effect on competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the ability of U.S. based enterprises to compete with foreign
based enterprises in other markets because the economic effects are minor. Therefore, a
Regulatory Impact Analysis is not required under E.O. 12866.
B. Federalism Assessment
The proposed rule 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 (October 30, 1987; 52 FR 41685), we have determined that this
notice does not have sufficient Federalism implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism
Assessment.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) PHMSA must consider whether a
rulemaking would have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
MMS recently conducted an analysis of 150 operators on the Gulf of Mexico OCS. For
publicly-traded operators, numbers of employees and annual sales are readily available on the
Internet. MMS was not able to get information on all operators on the OCS. Using the
criterion that a small company is one that employs less than 500 employees, 60 operators are
medium-to-large-size entities. Of the remaining operators, 36 are small, based on available
data, and 44 others were presumed to be small because no information about them was
available on the Internet. In sum, 80 operators on the Gulf of Mexico OCS may be considered
to be small.
The above breakdown describes the OCS sector of the natural gas and hazardous liquid
industry as a whole and provides the wider context in which to examine the actual community
that would be affected by the proposed rule.
Of the 150 production operators in the Gulf of Mexico, only 35 would be directly affected by
the proposed rule. Of these 35 operators, 11 are considered to be "small." There are about
ten producer pipeline operators on the Pacific OCS that may be affected by the proposed rule,
and four of these are considered to be small. Of the small operators to be affected by the
proposed rule, almost all are represented by the North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code 211111, which represents crude petroleum and natural gas
producers.
A pipeline company (non-producer) is a "small entity" if it is a liquid pipeline company with
fewer than 1,500 employees, or a natural gas pipeline company with gross annual receipts of
$25 million or less. There are about 18 entities operating on the OCS that can be interpreted
as "small independent pipeline companies." These small pipeline companies provide
transportation services for several non-major oil or gas producers with which they have an
"arms-length" but symbiotic business relationship. These companies are represented primarily
by NAICS codes 486210 (crude petroleum pipelines) and 486210 (natural gas transmission
pipelines).
The larger operators to be affected by the rule mostly fall into either NAICS Code 211111
(crude petroleum and natural gas producers), or NAICS Code 324110, which represents
petroleum refining. Companies operating on the OCS and that fall into NAICS Code 324110
tend to be the very large integrated natural gas and hazardous liquid companies.
Two of the larger operators in the Gulf of Mexico that have production pipelines are
represented under NAICS Code 486210 (natural gas transmission), and by NAICS Code
221210 (natural gas distribution). These classifications mean that the operators in question
normally operate as pipeline companies, and we anticipate that these two operators may
choose to remain under PHMSA regulation. Pipeline companies are considered "small" if they
have fewer than 1,500 employees, but both of these operators would be considered "large"
under the 1,500-employee criterion.
Natural gas and hazardous liquid production and transportation companies are classified
under NAICS Codes by the Census Bureau. The Small Business Administration further
classifies "small businesses" in the various offshore sectors as follows: (1) oil and gas producers
that have fewer than 500 employees; (2) liquid pipeline companies than have fewer than 1,500
employees; (3) natural gas pipeline companies that have gross annual receipts of $25 million or
less; and (4) offshore oil and gas field exploration service or production service companies that
have gross annual receipts of $5 million or less. There are many companies on the OCS that
are "small businesses" by these definitions.
However, the technology necessary for conducting offshore oil and gas exploration and
development activities is very complex and costly, and most entities that engage in offshore
activities have financial resources disproportionate to their numbers of employees and well
beyond what would normally be considered "small business." These entities customarily
conduct their operations by contracting with offshore drilling or service companies, and
therefore tend to have few employees in relation to their financial resources.
There are up to 150 designated operators of leases and 75 operators of transmission
pipelines on the OCS (both large and small operators), and the economic impacts on the oil and
gas production and transmission companies directly affected would be minor. All costs
imposed by the rule would be small compared to the normal operating and maintenance
expenses experienced by offshore pipeline operators. Direct costs to industry for the entire
proposed rule total less than $14,000 for the first year. This rule would not impose any new
restrictions on small pipeline service companies or manufacturers, nor will it cause their business
practices to change.
We conclude that the proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, I certify, pursuant
to section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605), that this
proposal will not, if implemented, have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. However, we are particularly interested
in receiving comments from any small business operators believing otherwise.
This certification is subject to modification as a result of a review of the
comments received in response to this proposal.
D. Executive Order 13084
This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria
contained in Executive Order 13084 ("Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments"). Because this proposed rule effects the Federally managed OCS and does not
affect the communities of the Indian tribal governments and nor impose any direct compliance
costs, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13084 do not apply.
E. Executive Order 13132
This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria
contained in Executive Order 13132 ("Federalism"). This proposed rule does not propose any
regulation that:
(1) Has substantial direct effects on the States, the relationship between the national
government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government;
(2) Imposes substantial direct compliance costs on States and local governments; or
(3) Preempts state law.
Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 (64 FR
43255; August 10, 1999) do not apply.
F. Unfunded Mandates
This proposed rule would not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995. It would not result in costs of over $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 objectives.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not contain information collection requirements estimated to effect
more than ten respondents per year.
H. National Environmental Policy Act
We have analyzed this action for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and have determined that this proposed rule would not significantly affect
the quality of the human environment. The Environmental Assessment of this proposal is
available for review in the docket.
I. Executive Order 13211 (Energy)
We have reviewed this proposed rule in accordance with Executive Order 13211 regarding
the energy of Federal regulations and have determined that this proposed rule does not have
any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use. Therefore, no reasonable
alternatives to this action are necessary.
List of Subjects:
49 CFR 191
Gas, Pipeline safety. Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
49 CFR Part 192.
Hazardous liquid, Natural gas, Pipeline safety, Pipelines, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 195
Ammonia, Carbon dioxide, Petroleum, Pipeline safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 49 CFR Parts 191, 192 and 195 is proposed to
be amended as follows.
Part 191 - [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 191 would continue to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5121, 60102, 60103, 60104, 60108, 60117, 60118, 60124; and
49 CFR 1.53.
2. Section 191.1 would be amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Offshore gathering of gas in State waters upstream from the outlet flange of each
facility where hydrocarbons are produced or where produced hydrocarbons are first
separated, dehydrated, or otherwise processed, whichever facility is farther downstream;
(2) Pipelines on the Outer Continental Shelf that are producer-operated and
cross into State waters without first connecting to a transporting operator's
facility, upstream (generally seaward) of the last valve on the last production
facility (excluding pipeline risers and associated safety equipment). Producing
operators may petition the Administrator, or designee, for approval to operate
under PHMSA regulations governing pipeline design, construction, operation,
and maintenance under section 190.9 of this Part;
(3) Pipelines on the Outer Continental Shelf upstream of the point at which operating
responsibility transfers from a producing operator to a transporting operator; or
(4) Onshore gathering of gas outside of the following areas:
(i) An area within the limits of any incorporated or unincorporated city, town, or
village.
(ii) Any designated residential or commercial area such as a subdivision, business or
shopping center, or community development.
Part 192 - [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 192 would continue to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60109, 60110,60113, 60118; and
49 CFR 1.53.
2. Section 192.1 would be amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Offshore gathering of gas in State waters upstream from the outlet flange of each facility
where hydrocarbons are produced or where produced hydrocarbons are first separated,
dehydrated, or otherwise processed, whichever facility is farther downstream;
(2) Pipelines on the Outer Continental Shelf that are producer-operated and
cross into State waters without first connecting to a transporting operator's
facility, upstream (generally seaward) of the last valve on the last production
facility (excluding pipeline risers and associated safety equipment). Producing
operators may petition the Administrator, or designee, for approval to operate
under PHMSA regulations governing pipeline design, construction, operation,
and maintenance under section 190.9 of this Part;
(3) Pipelines on the Outer Continental Shelf upstream of the point at which operating
responsibility transfers from a producing operator to a transporting operator;
(4) Onshore gathering of gas outside of the following areas:
(i) An area within the limits of any incorporated or unincorporated city, town, or
village.
(ii) Any designated residential or commercial area such as a subdivision, business or
shopping center, or community development.
(5) Onshore gathering of gas within inlets of the Gulf of Mexico except as provided in
§192.612; or
(6) Any pipeline system that transports only petroleum gas or petroleum gas/air mixtures
to-
(i) Fewer than 10 customers, if no portion of the system is located in a public place; or
(ii) A single customer, if the system is located entirely on the customer's premises (no
matter if a portion of the system is located in a public place).
Part 195 - [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 195 would continue to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60109, 60118; and 49 CFR 1.53.
2. Section 195.1 would be amended by revising paragraph (b) to remove paragraphs
(b)(5) and (b)(6) and to add paragraphs (b)(5), (b)(6), and (b)(7) to read as follows:
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(5) Transportation of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide in offshore
pipelines in State waters which are located upstream from the outlet
flange of each facility where hydrocarbons or carbon dioxide are
produced or where produced hydrocarbons or carbon dioxide are first
separated, dehydrated, or otherwise processed, whichever facility is
farther downstream;
(6) Transportation of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide in Outer Continental Shelf
pipelines which are located upstream of the point at which operating responsibility
transfers from a producing operator to a transporting operator;
(7) Pipelines on the Outer Continental Shelf that are producer-operated and
cross into State waters without first connecting to a transporting operator's
facility, upstream (generally seaward) of the last valve on the last production
facility (excluding pipeline risers and associated safety equipment). Producing
operators may petition the Administrator or designee for approval to operate
under PHMSA regulations governing pipeline design, construction, operation,
and maintenance under section 190.9 of this Part;
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, D.C. on ________________
Stacey L. Gerard
Associate Administrator
For Pipeline Safety
|