Pipeline Safety: Public Comment on Leak and Valve Studies Mandated by the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011, 19414-19416 [2012-7729]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
19414
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices
UP also requests FRA approval of all
locomotive horn test data acquired by
any of UP’s ASMS that meet the
requirements of SAE ARP–4 721, and
have been calibrated in accordance with
this waiver.
A copy of the petition, as well as any
written communications concerning the
petition, is available for review online at
https://www.regulations.gov and in
person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation’s (DOT) Docket
Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12–140, Washington, DC
20590. The Docket Operations Facility
is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
Interested parties are invited to
participate in these proceedings by
submitting written views, data, or
comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in
connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a
hearing. If any interested party desires
an opportunity for oral comment, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before
the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
All communications concerning these
proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver
Petition Docket Number FRA–2012–
0023) and may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
• Web site: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Operations Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
Communications received by May 14,
2012 will be considered by FRA before
final action is taken. Comments received
after that date will be considered as far
as practicable.
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of any written
communications and comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78), or
online at https://www.dot.gov/
privacy.html.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:11 Mar 29, 2012
Jkt 226001
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 26,
2012.
Ron Hynes,
Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for
Regulatory and Legislative Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012–7614 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket ID PHMSA–2012–0021]
Pipeline Safety: Public Comment on
Leak and Valve Studies Mandated by
the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory
Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Public Comment.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Transportation (DOT), Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) is providing
an important opportunity through this
notice for all stakeholders to publically
comment on the scope of recently
commissioned studies involving leak
detection systems and valves. This
action and others described within this
notice will support the comprehensive
investigation of topics and issues
Congress has charged to PHMSA.
DATES: PHMSA must have all comments
submitted by close of business April 30,
2012.
ADDRESSES: Comments should reference
Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0021 and
may be submitted in the following ways:
• E–Gov Web Site: https://
www.Regulations.gov. This site allows
the public to enter comments on any
Federal Register notice issued by any
agency.
• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
• Mail: DOT Docket Management
System: U.S. DOT, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. DOT Docket
Management System; West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590–0001 between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Instructions: You should identify the
Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0021 at the
beginning of your comments. If you
submit your comments by mail, submit
two copies. To receive confirmation that
PHMSA received your comments,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00238
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
include a self-addressed stamped
postcard. Internet users may submit
comments at https://
www.regulations.gov.
Note: Comments are posted without
changes or edits to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. There is a privacy
statement published on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Any technically substantive
comments received after the comment
closing date will be considered to the
extent practicable.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Contact Max Kieba at 202–493–0595 or
Email: max.kieba@dot.gov for questions
regarding the leak detection study.
Contact Patrick Landon at 202–695–
0798 or Email: patrick.landon@dot.gov
for questions regarding the valve study.
Background: The recent passage of the
Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty,
and Job Creation Act of 2011 has called
for several commissioned studies and
reports to Congress that PHMSA must
address and complete. Further, PHMSA
is also evaluating how to address several
concerns raised by recent National
Transportation Safety Board
recommendations.
PHMSA has commissioned two
studies to gather facts and perform
technical, operational, and economical
analyses about the constraints and
implications for expanding the uses of
leak detection systems and automatic
and remote controlled valves. PHMSA
believes that the scope of these studies
should have a wide stakeholder review
and input and seeks public input
through two venues.
First is the public workshop on
Improving Pipeline Leak Detection
System Effectiveness and
Understanding the Application of
Automatic/Remote Control Valves on
March 27–28, 2012. This workshop will
examine how to encourage operators to
expand usage of leak detection systems
(LDS) and improve system effectiveness
on the Nation’s pipeline infrastructure
and how remote control and automatic
control valves can be installed to lessen
the volume of natural gas and hazardous
liquid released during catastrophic
pipeline events. These public meetings
are designed to provide an open forum
for exchanging information on the
challenges associated with LDS and
automatic/remote control valves.
Second is the opportunity for all
stakeholders to publically comment on
the scope of these two studies. This
notice was designed to do just that. The
following sections identify what
Congress has mandated in these studies
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices
and the scope of work PHMSA has
factored into each study.
Leak Detection Study
The Congress included the following
language from the Act related to the leak
detection study:
‘‘SEC. 8. LEAK DETECTION.
(a) LEAK DETECTION REPORT.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Transportation shall submit to
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate and the
Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy
and Commerce of the House of
Representatives a report on leak detection
systems utilized by operators of hazardous
liquid pipeline facilities and transportationrelated flow lines.
(2) CONTENTS.—The report shall
include—
(A) An analysis of the technical limitations
of current leak detection systems, including
the ability of the systems to detect ruptures
and small leaks that are ongoing or
intermittent, and what can be done to foster
development of better technologies; and
(B) An analysis of the practicability of
establishing technically, operationally, and
economically feasible standards for the
capability of such systems to detect leaks,
and the safety benefits and adverse
consequences of requiring operators to use
leak detection systems.’’
PHMSA has commissioned a leak
detection study containing the following
work scope:
Task 1—Kickoff Meeting
A kickoff meeting will be held via
webinar or phone call to review the
scope of the project.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Task 2—Attendance at Public Workshop
The contractor will attend PHMSA’s
Improving Pipeline Leak Detection
System Effectiveness Public Workshop
on March 27, 2012. Any public input
from that workshop will be considered
for any potential modifications of the
scope of work and when developing the
final report.
Task 3—Review and Assess Previous
Pipeline Incidents
PHMSA will provide access to its
pipeline incident data. The contractor
will examine past pipeline incidents
and consider any non-PHMSA datasets
that may provide useful insight and
analysis to meet project objectives. This
evaluation will help determine whether
implementation of further leak detection
capabilities would have mitigated
effects to the public and surrounding
environment. The contractor will use
standard fire science practices to
perform the risk analysis to property,
public, and the environment. This
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:11 Mar 29, 2012
Jkt 226001
evaluation will also help determine the
level of protection needed for adequate
mitigation.
Task 4—Technological Feasibility
The contractor will compare all
methods to determine whether current
systems (or multiple systems) are able to
adequately protect the public and the
environment from pipeline leaks or
incidents. The contractor is to look at
legacy equipment currently utilized by
operators, their ability to retrofit, and all
benefits and drawbacks of all methods.
The contractor is to consider the
method/systems ability to detect small/
intermittent leaks and identify and
explain any technology gaps.
Task 5—Operational Feasibility
The contractor will analyze leak
detection methods and systems that are
currently being used throughout the
industry. This task includes defining
and categorizing leak detection methods
and systems that range from visual
inspection techniques, instrumented
monitoring of internal pipeline
conditions, and external
instrumentation for detecting leaked
hydrocarbons. This task includes a view
of how many operators are adequately
protecting their infrastructure with leak
detection systems, and an analysis of
operational aspects (i.e. procedures,
protocols, best practices, workforce,
etc.). The contractor will consider
reliability, availability and
maintainability of system aspects and
analyze how further leak detection
methods/system deployment would
affect pipeline operations.
Task 6—Economical Feasibility
The contractor will perform a cost
benefit analysis for deploying leak
detection systems on new and existing
pipeline systems. The cost benefit will
determine the lifetime operational cost
of the system and take into account the
benefit that may be seen by the public
and surrounding environment over the
anticipated life cycle of the individual
leak detection systems. The analysis
will focus on the entire pipeline
infrastructure with a separate analysis to
include pipelines in high consequence
areas (HCAs) only. Damage to
surrounding environment/public must
utilize standard fire science practices.
Task 7—Analyze Leak Detection
Standards
The contractor is to analyze the
practicability of establishing
technically, operationally, and
economically feasible leak detection
standards to provide adequate
protection to the Nation against pipeline
PO 00000
Frm 00239
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19415
leaks, if such standards don’t already
exist. The analysis should be specific to
the type of pipeline (gas distribution,
gas transmission, hazardous liquid
pipeline facilities, transportation-related
flow lines, etc.) and consider pipeline
locations (i.e., Class Locations, HCAs,
non-HCAs, etc.).
The deliverable from this study will
embody the supporting information
reported to Congress starting in
December 2012, and will be publically
available from PHMSA’s Web site at
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/
library.
Automatic and Remote-Controlled
Shut-Off Valves
Congress included the following
language from the Act related to the
valve study:
‘‘SEC. 4. AUTOMATIC AND REMOTECONTROLLED SHUT-OFF VALVES.
Section 60102 is amended—
(1) By striking subsection (j)(3); and
(2) By adding at the end the following:
(n) Automatic and Remote-Controlled
Shut-OFF Valves for New Transmission
Pipelines.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years
after the date of enactment of this subsection,
and after considering the factors specified in
subsection (b)(2), the Secretary, if
appropriate, shall require by regulation the
use of automatic or remote-controlled shutoff valves, or equivalent technology, where
economically, technically, and operationally
feasible on transmission pipeline facilities
constructed or entirely replaced after the date
on which the Secretary issues the final rule
containing such requirement.
(2) HIGH-CONSEQUENCE AREA
STUDY.—
(A) STUDY.—The Comptroller General of
the United States shall conduct a study on
the ability of transmission pipeline facility
operators to respond to a hazardous liquid or
gas release from a pipeline segment located
in a high-consequence area.
(B) CONSIDERATIONS.—In conducting
the study, the Comptroller General shall
consider the swiftness of leak detection and
pipeline shutdown capabilities, the location
of the nearest response personnel, and the
costs, risks, and benefits of installing
automatic and remote-controlled shut-off
valves.
(C) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after
the date of enactment of this subsection, the
Comptroller General shall submit to the
Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy
and Commerce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of
the Senate a report on the results of the
study.’’
PHMSA has commissioned a study on
the requirements of automatic and
remote-controlled shut-off valves that
cover natural gas and hazardous liquid
lines containing the following work
scope:
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
19416
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices
the environment of a requirement to
install automatic and remote controlled
shut-off valves within HCAs and Class
3 and Class 4 areas.
Task 2: Attend Public Workshop
The contractor will attend PHMSA’s
Understanding the Application of
Automatic Control and Remote Control
Valves public workshop on March 28,
2012. The contractor will review and
provide feedback on any result from the
workshop. The feedback should be
incorporated into the tasked studies.
This can potentially lead to a
modification of scope and costs if
warranted
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Task 1: Kickoff Meeting
A kickoff meeting will be held via
webinar or phone call to review the
scope of the project.
Task 4: Required Study on Automatic
and Remote Controlled Shut-Off Valves
on Newly Constructed or Entirely
Replaced Facilities
The contractor is to study the use of
automatic or remote controlled shut-off
valves in newly- constructed and
entirely replaced facilities constructed
after January 2012. This study should
address the economical, technical and
operational feasibility of this
requirement. The following points
should be incorporated into the study.
Task 3: Required Study on Automatic
and Remote-Controlled Shut-off Valves
on HCAs and Class 3 and Class 4 Areas
on Natural Gas Pipelines
The contractor will conduct a study
on the ability of transmission pipeline
facility operators to respond to a
hazardous liquid or gas release from a
pipeline segment located in a HCA. This
study will evaluate Class 3 and Class 4
areas of natural gas transmission
pipelines.
The contractor must analyze the
technical and operational ability of the
swiftness of the existing leak detection
system and the operator’s capability to
shut down the affected pipeline, and
consider upstream and downstream
controls, automation, supervisory
control and data acquisition systems,
and valve spacing. Also to be discussed
are human factors of response,
specifically, what is the minimum
response time and the nearest required
human to initiate isolation of the
pipeline?
The contractor must perform a cost
benefit analysis for installing automatic
and remote controlled shut-off valves in
HCAs and for gas transmission Class 3
and Class 4 areas. The cost benefit must
determine the lifetime operational cost
of the system and take into account the
benefit that may be seen by the public
and surrounding environment. Analysis
should include the economic impact of
damage to surrounding environment/
public and utilize standard fire science
practices to derive the result.
The contractor will perform a risk
analysis of installing automatic and
remote controlled shut-off valves as
compared to local manual operation of
isolation valves on transmission
pipelines. The contractor will use
standard fire science practices to
perform the risk analysis that will
analyze the risk to property, the public,
and the environment.
The contractor is to analyze and
discuss the benefits to the public and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:11 Mar 29, 2012
Jkt 226001
Economic Feasibility
The contractor will perform a cost
benefit analysis for installing automatic
and remote controlled shut-off valves on
new and entirely replaced pipeline
systems. This cost benefit will
determine the lifetime operational cost
of the system and take into account the
benefit that may be seen by the public
and surrounding environment over the
anticipated life cycle of automatic and
remote controlled shut-off valves
installed. Analysis should include the
economic impact of damage to the
surrounding environment/public and
utilize standard fire science practices to
derive the result.
Technical Feasibility
The contractor is to compare all types
of automatic and remote controlled
shut-off valves and determine whether
available technologies can adequately
protect the public and environment
from pipeline leaks and incidents
through rapid closure, and discuss
benefits and drawbacks of all methods.
Giving special consideration to the
method/systems ability to detect and
react to small/intermittent leaks, the
contractor is to identify and explain any
technology gaps and analyze any
technological shortfalls specific to
automatic shut-off valves’ reliability.
Modeling of rapid closure of valves will
utilize standard fire science practices to
establish benchmarks for technical
feasibility. The contractor is also to
determine if there are alternative
technologies to automatic and remote
controlled shut-off valves and
investigate and explain these
technologies.
Operational Feasibility
The contractor will review and
summarize DOT’s current regulations
addressing the installation of automatic
and remote controlled shut-off valves.
This review will be for hazardous liquid
PO 00000
Frm 00240
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
and natural gas pipelines and determine
how operators are currently complying
with them. The contractor will analyze
operational aspects (i.e. procedures,
protocols, best practices, workforce,
etc.) and discuss reliability, availability
and maintainability of these systems.
The contractor will analyze how
automatic and remote controlled shutoff valve installation would affect
pipeline operations. Also, the contractor
will consider how emergency first
responders should be addressed in the
operational feasibility study.
Task 5—Review and Assess Previous
Pipeline Incidents
PHMSA will provide access to
pipeline incident data. The contractor
will examine past pipeline incidents to
determine whether installation of either
automatic or remote controlled shut-off
valves would have mitigated effects to
the public and surrounding
environment. The contractor will use
standard fire science practices to
perform the risk analysis to property,
the public, and the environment.
The deliverable from this study will
embody the supporting information
reported to Congress starting in
December 2012, and will be publically
available on PHMSA’s Web site at
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/
library.
Any individual or organization can
submit comments on any of these
commissioned studies. However, there
are time constraints to reporting to
Congress. In order to meet the time
constraints, PHMSA must have all
comments submitted by close of
business April 30, 2012.
Some key questions for your
consideration are:
Is PHMSA’s commissioned work
scope adequate for supporting a
comprehensive report to Congress?
If not, what additional or revised
work scope actions should PHMSA
consider?
Is there a related technical report
publically available that these studies
should review?
Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on
March 26, 2012.
Linda Daugherty,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy
and Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012–7729 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 62 (Friday, March 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19414-19416]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7729]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
[Docket ID PHMSA-2012-0021]
Pipeline Safety: Public Comment on Leak and Valve Studies
Mandated by the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation
Act of 2011
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Public Comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation (DOT), Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is providing an important
opportunity through this notice for all stakeholders to publically
comment on the scope of recently commissioned studies involving leak
detection systems and valves. This action and others described within
this notice will support the comprehensive investigation of topics and
issues Congress has charged to PHMSA.
DATES: PHMSA must have all comments submitted by close of business
April 30, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Comments should reference Docket No. PHMSA-2012-0021 and may
be submitted in the following ways:
E-Gov Web Site: https://www.Regulations.gov. This site
allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice
issued by any agency.
Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
Mail: DOT Docket Management System: U.S. DOT, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery: U.S. DOT Docket Management System; West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
Instructions: You should identify the Docket No. PHMSA-2012-0021 at
the beginning of your comments. If you submit your comments by mail,
submit two copies. To receive confirmation that PHMSA received your
comments, include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Internet users may
submit comments at https://www.regulations.gov.
Note: Comments are posted without changes or edits to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
There is a privacy statement published on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Any technically substantive comments received after the comment
closing date will be considered to the extent practicable.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Max Kieba at 202-493-0595 or
Email: max.kieba@dot.gov for questions regarding the leak detection
study. Contact Patrick Landon at 202-695-0798 or Email:
patrick.landon@dot.gov for questions regarding the valve study.
Background: The recent passage of the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory
Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 has called for several
commissioned studies and reports to Congress that PHMSA must address
and complete. Further, PHMSA is also evaluating how to address several
concerns raised by recent National Transportation Safety Board
recommendations.
PHMSA has commissioned two studies to gather facts and perform
technical, operational, and economical analyses about the constraints
and implications for expanding the uses of leak detection systems and
automatic and remote controlled valves. PHMSA believes that the scope
of these studies should have a wide stakeholder review and input and
seeks public input through two venues.
First is the public workshop on Improving Pipeline Leak Detection
System Effectiveness and Understanding the Application of Automatic/
Remote Control Valves on March 27-28, 2012. This workshop will examine
how to encourage operators to expand usage of leak detection systems
(LDS) and improve system effectiveness on the Nation's pipeline
infrastructure and how remote control and automatic control valves can
be installed to lessen the volume of natural gas and hazardous liquid
released during catastrophic pipeline events. These public meetings are
designed to provide an open forum for exchanging information on the
challenges associated with LDS and automatic/remote control valves.
Second is the opportunity for all stakeholders to publically
comment on the scope of these two studies. This notice was designed to
do just that. The following sections identify what Congress has
mandated in these studies
[[Page 19415]]
and the scope of work PHMSA has factored into each study.
Leak Detection Study
The Congress included the following language from the Act related
to the leak detection study:
``SEC. 8. LEAK DETECTION.
(a) LEAK DETECTION REPORT.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall submit
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives
a report on leak detection systems utilized by operators of
hazardous liquid pipeline facilities and transportation-related flow
lines.
(2) CONTENTS.--The report shall include--
(A) An analysis of the technical limitations of current leak
detection systems, including the ability of the systems to detect
ruptures and small leaks that are ongoing or intermittent, and what
can be done to foster development of better technologies; and
(B) An analysis of the practicability of establishing
technically, operationally, and economically feasible standards for
the capability of such systems to detect leaks, and the safety
benefits and adverse consequences of requiring operators to use leak
detection systems.''
PHMSA has commissioned a leak detection study containing the
following work scope:
Task 1--Kickoff Meeting
A kickoff meeting will be held via webinar or phone call to review
the scope of the project.
Task 2--Attendance at Public Workshop
The contractor will attend PHMSA's Improving Pipeline Leak
Detection System Effectiveness Public Workshop on March 27, 2012. Any
public input from that workshop will be considered for any potential
modifications of the scope of work and when developing the final
report.
Task 3--Review and Assess Previous Pipeline Incidents
PHMSA will provide access to its pipeline incident data. The
contractor will examine past pipeline incidents and consider any non-
PHMSA datasets that may provide useful insight and analysis to meet
project objectives. This evaluation will help determine whether
implementation of further leak detection capabilities would have
mitigated effects to the public and surrounding environment. The
contractor will use standard fire science practices to perform the risk
analysis to property, public, and the environment. This evaluation will
also help determine the level of protection needed for adequate
mitigation.
Task 4--Technological Feasibility
The contractor will compare all methods to determine whether
current systems (or multiple systems) are able to adequately protect
the public and the environment from pipeline leaks or incidents. The
contractor is to look at legacy equipment currently utilized by
operators, their ability to retrofit, and all benefits and drawbacks of
all methods. The contractor is to consider the method/systems ability
to detect small/intermittent leaks and identify and explain any
technology gaps.
Task 5--Operational Feasibility
The contractor will analyze leak detection methods and systems that
are currently being used throughout the industry. This task includes
defining and categorizing leak detection methods and systems that range
from visual inspection techniques, instrumented monitoring of internal
pipeline conditions, and external instrumentation for detecting leaked
hydrocarbons. This task includes a view of how many operators are
adequately protecting their infrastructure with leak detection systems,
and an analysis of operational aspects (i.e. procedures, protocols,
best practices, workforce, etc.). The contractor will consider
reliability, availability and maintainability of system aspects and
analyze how further leak detection methods/system deployment would
affect pipeline operations.
Task 6--Economical Feasibility
The contractor will perform a cost benefit analysis for deploying
leak detection systems on new and existing pipeline systems. The cost
benefit will determine the lifetime operational cost of the system and
take into account the benefit that may be seen by the public and
surrounding environment over the anticipated life cycle of the
individual leak detection systems. The analysis will focus on the
entire pipeline infrastructure with a separate analysis to include
pipelines in high consequence areas (HCAs) only. Damage to surrounding
environment/public must utilize standard fire science practices.
Task 7--Analyze Leak Detection Standards
The contractor is to analyze the practicability of establishing
technically, operationally, and economically feasible leak detection
standards to provide adequate protection to the Nation against pipeline
leaks, if such standards don't already exist. The analysis should be
specific to the type of pipeline (gas distribution, gas transmission,
hazardous liquid pipeline facilities, transportation-related flow
lines, etc.) and consider pipeline locations (i.e., Class Locations,
HCAs, non-HCAs, etc.).
The deliverable from this study will embody the supporting
information reported to Congress starting in December 2012, and will be
publically available from PHMSA's Web site at https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/library.
Automatic and Remote-Controlled Shut-Off Valves
Congress included the following language from the Act related to
the valve study:
``SEC. 4. AUTOMATIC AND REMOTE-CONTROLLED SHUT-OFF VALVES.
Section 60102 is amended--
(1) By striking subsection (j)(3); and
(2) By adding at the end the following:
(n) Automatic and Remote-Controlled Shut-OFF Valves for New
Transmission Pipelines.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this subsection, and after considering the factors
specified in subsection (b)(2), the Secretary, if appropriate, shall
require by regulation the use of automatic or remote-controlled
shut-off valves, or equivalent technology, where economically,
technically, and operationally feasible on transmission pipeline
facilities constructed or entirely replaced after the date on which
the Secretary issues the final rule containing such requirement.
(2) HIGH-CONSEQUENCE AREA STUDY.--
(A) STUDY.--The Comptroller General of the United States shall
conduct a study on the ability of transmission pipeline facility
operators to respond to a hazardous liquid or gas release from a
pipeline segment located in a high-consequence area.
(B) CONSIDERATIONS.--In conducting the study, the Comptroller
General shall consider the swiftness of leak detection and pipeline
shutdown capabilities, the location of the nearest response
personnel, and the costs, risks, and benefits of installing
automatic and remote-controlled shut-off valves.
(C) REPORT.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of this subsection, the Comptroller General shall submit to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on
Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a
report on the results of the study.''
PHMSA has commissioned a study on the requirements of automatic and
remote-controlled shut-off valves that cover natural gas and hazardous
liquid lines containing the following work scope:
[[Page 19416]]
Task 1: Kickoff Meeting
A kickoff meeting will be held via webinar or phone call to review
the scope of the project.
Task 2: Attend Public Workshop
The contractor will attend PHMSA's Understanding the Application of
Automatic Control and Remote Control Valves public workshop on March
28, 2012. The contractor will review and provide feedback on any result
from the workshop. The feedback should be incorporated into the tasked
studies. This can potentially lead to a modification of scope and costs
if warranted
Task 3: Required Study on Automatic and Remote-Controlled Shut-off
Valves on HCAs and Class 3 and Class 4 Areas on Natural Gas Pipelines
The contractor will conduct a study on the ability of transmission
pipeline facility operators to respond to a hazardous liquid or gas
release from a pipeline segment located in a HCA. This study will
evaluate Class 3 and Class 4 areas of natural gas transmission
pipelines.
The contractor must analyze the technical and operational ability
of the swiftness of the existing leak detection system and the
operator's capability to shut down the affected pipeline, and consider
upstream and downstream controls, automation, supervisory control and
data acquisition systems, and valve spacing. Also to be discussed are
human factors of response, specifically, what is the minimum response
time and the nearest required human to initiate isolation of the
pipeline?
The contractor must perform a cost benefit analysis for installing
automatic and remote controlled shut-off valves in HCAs and for gas
transmission Class 3 and Class 4 areas. The cost benefit must determine
the lifetime operational cost of the system and take into account the
benefit that may be seen by the public and surrounding environment.
Analysis should include the economic impact of damage to surrounding
environment/public and utilize standard fire science practices to
derive the result.
The contractor will perform a risk analysis of installing automatic
and remote controlled shut-off valves as compared to local manual
operation of isolation valves on transmission pipelines. The contractor
will use standard fire science practices to perform the risk analysis
that will analyze the risk to property, the public, and the
environment.
The contractor is to analyze and discuss the benefits to the public
and the environment of a requirement to install automatic and remote
controlled shut-off valves within HCAs and Class 3 and Class 4 areas.
Task 4: Required Study on Automatic and Remote Controlled Shut-Off
Valves on Newly Constructed or Entirely Replaced Facilities
The contractor is to study the use of automatic or remote
controlled shut-off valves in newly- constructed and entirely replaced
facilities constructed after January 2012. This study should address
the economical, technical and operational feasibility of this
requirement. The following points should be incorporated into the
study.
Economic Feasibility
The contractor will perform a cost benefit analysis for installing
automatic and remote controlled shut-off valves on new and entirely
replaced pipeline systems. This cost benefit will determine the
lifetime operational cost of the system and take into account the
benefit that may be seen by the public and surrounding environment over
the anticipated life cycle of automatic and remote controlled shut-off
valves installed. Analysis should include the economic impact of damage
to the surrounding environment/public and utilize standard fire science
practices to derive the result.
Technical Feasibility
The contractor is to compare all types of automatic and remote
controlled shut-off valves and determine whether available technologies
can adequately protect the public and environment from pipeline leaks
and incidents through rapid closure, and discuss benefits and drawbacks
of all methods. Giving special consideration to the method/systems
ability to detect and react to small/intermittent leaks, the contractor
is to identify and explain any technology gaps and analyze any
technological shortfalls specific to automatic shut-off valves'
reliability. Modeling of rapid closure of valves will utilize standard
fire science practices to establish benchmarks for technical
feasibility. The contractor is also to determine if there are
alternative technologies to automatic and remote controlled shut-off
valves and investigate and explain these technologies.
Operational Feasibility
The contractor will review and summarize DOT's current regulations
addressing the installation of automatic and remote controlled shut-off
valves. This review will be for hazardous liquid and natural gas
pipelines and determine how operators are currently complying with
them. The contractor will analyze operational aspects (i.e. procedures,
protocols, best practices, workforce, etc.) and discuss reliability,
availability and maintainability of these systems. The contractor will
analyze how automatic and remote controlled shut-off valve installation
would affect pipeline operations. Also, the contractor will consider
how emergency first responders should be addressed in the operational
feasibility study.
Task 5--Review and Assess Previous Pipeline Incidents
PHMSA will provide access to pipeline incident data. The contractor
will examine past pipeline incidents to determine whether installation
of either automatic or remote controlled shut-off valves would have
mitigated effects to the public and surrounding environment. The
contractor will use standard fire science practices to perform the risk
analysis to property, the public, and the environment.
The deliverable from this study will embody the supporting
information reported to Congress starting in December 2012, and will be
publically available on PHMSA's Web site at https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/library.
Any individual or organization can submit comments on any of these
commissioned studies. However, there are time constraints to reporting
to Congress. In order to meet the time constraints, PHMSA must have all
comments submitted by close of business April 30, 2012.
Some key questions for your consideration are:
Is PHMSA's commissioned work scope adequate for supporting a
comprehensive report to Congress?
If not, what additional or revised work scope actions should PHMSA
consider?
Is there a related technical report publically available that these
studies should review?
Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on March 26, 2012.
Linda Daugherty,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy and Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-7729 Filed 3-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
