Proposed Rule2025-12118
Pipeline Safety: Eliminating Burdensome and Duplicative Deadlines for Gas Pipeline Coating Damage Assessments and Remedial Actions
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 1, 2025
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Abstract
PHMSA is proposing to revise the regulations related to coating damage assessments and remedial actions for gas transmission pipeline operators by adjusting the timeframe in which operators must perform external anti-corrosion coating assessments and any repairs following an unsatisfactory assessment result. This proposed change will provide significant cost savings to gas transmission pipeline operators, eliminate ineffective regulations, and simplify current requirements.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28593-28597]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-12118]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 192
[Docket No. PHMSA-2025-0114]
RIN 2137-AF84
Pipeline Safety: Eliminating Burdensome and Duplicative Deadlines
for Gas Pipeline Coating Damage Assessments and Remedial Actions
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PHMSA is proposing to revise the regulations related to
coating damage assessments and remedial actions for gas transmission
pipeline operators by adjusting the timeframe in which operators must
perform external anti-corrosion coating assessments and any repairs
following an unsatisfactory assessment result. This proposed change
will provide significant cost savings to gas transmission pipeline
operators, eliminate ineffective regulations, and simplify current
requirements.
DATES: Persons interested in submitting written comments on this NPRM
must do so by September 2, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Docket Number
PHMSA-2025-0114 using any of the following methods:
E-Gov Web: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. This site allows the public
to enter comments on any Federal Register notice issued by any agency.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery: U.S. DOT Docket Management System: West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
For commenting instructions and additional information about
commenting, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Jagger, Senior Transportation
Specialist, by telephone at 202-366-4361 or by email at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5a2835383f282e74303b3d3d3f281a3e352e743d352c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d5a7bab7b0a7a1fbbfb4b2b2b0a795b1baa1fbb2baa3">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Discussion
PHMSA is proposing to revise the current requirements governing the
timelines for operators to perform assessments of external anti-
corrosion coating following installation of pipe in a ditch (see
Sec. Sec. 192.319(d) and 192.461(f)) and to complete remedial actions
following an unsatisfactory assessment (see Sec. Sec. 192.319(f) and
192.461(h)). The existing requirements state that, for certain
projects, operators must perform coating damage assessments on the
pipeline using direct current voltage gradient (DCVG) surveys,
alternating current voltage gradient (ACVG) surveys, or other
technology that provides comparable information about the integrity of
the pipeline's coating ``promptly'' following the completion of any
backfilling of the trench (and in any event no later than 6 months
following in-service date of the pipeline). The existing requirements
also direct operators to develop remedial action plans, and apply for
any necessary permits, within 6 months of completing an assessment that
identifies coating deficiencies.
PHMSA has preliminarily determined that these provisions are
impractical, unduly burdensome, and unnecessary.
[[Page 28594]]
The approach in Sec. Sec. 192.319(d) and 192.461(f) of linking
assessment performance deadlines to the date of backfill completion is
often difficult to implement, as operators and regulators cannot always
determine when backfilling has officially started or completed; in
fact, there might be numerous backfilling dates throughout a project's
duration. That uncertainty is compounded by the use of vague durational
language (``promptly [after the backfill]'') in each regulatory
provision.
Similarly, the approach in Sec. Sec. 192.319(f) and 192.419(h) of
linking timelines based on the date of application for required permits
has also proven challenging in practice. Pipeline projects can involve
multiple permits--none of which would be issued by PHMSA--applied for
and obtained at different times; operators must incur administrative
costs associated with tracking the status of these permits to ensure
compliance with PHMSA regulations.
Industry trade associations have noted that these implementation
challenges arising from the current text of Sec. Sec. 192.319 and
192.461 have real-world financial consequences for operators who often
choose to respond to this regulatory uncertainty by erring on the side
of caution and performing more (expensive) coating assessments than may
be necessary for evaluating the coating protection of their pipelines.
Operators may also find themselves creating parallel permit tracking
systems within those parts of their organizations responsible for each
of compliance with PHMSA regulatory requirements and obtaining
necessary construction permits (Docket No. DOT-OST-2025-0026-0897 (May
5, 2025)).
PHMSA proposes to streamline each of the above provisions to
address these implementation challenges. With respect to Sec. Sec.
192.319(d) and 192.461(f), PHMSA proposes to eliminate vague language
(``promptly'') in the opening sentence of those provisions as well as
eliminate the references to ``backfill'' as a milestone from which the
timeline for conducting coating assessments begins. By way of
substitute, PHMSA instead proposes to link assessment timelines in each
provision to a milestone--the pipeline segment's in-service date--that
is understood throughout the industry as a discrete moment of time
memorialized in operator work management systems, and which is already
referenced in provisions throughout the pipeline safety regulations
(PSRs, 49 CFR parts 190-199). PHMSA proposes to eliminate references in
Sec. Sec. 192.319(f) and 192.419(h) to permit application dates and
instead emphasize the date of the failed coating assessment for
calculation of timelines for performing remedial actions.
PHMSA understands these amendments align with industry stakeholder
recommendations. PHMSA does not expect these proposed regulatory
amendments would adversely affect safety, as they will likely
facilitate operator implementation of external corrosion protection
assessment requirements by substituting discrete milestones for vague
language and prolonged processes referenced in current regulatory text.
Commenting
Instructions: Please include the docket number PHMSA-2025-0114 at
the beginning of your comments. If you submit your comments by mail,
submit two copies. If you wish to receive confirmation that PHMSA
received your comments, include a self-addressed stamped postcard.
Internet users may submit comments at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Note: Comments are posted without changes or edits to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, including any personal information provided.
There is a privacy statement published on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 United States Code (U.S.C.)
553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to inform its rulemaking
process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal
information the commenter provides, to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, as
described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at <a href="https://www.dot.gov/privacy">https://www.dot.gov/privacy</a>.
Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. It is important that you clearly designate the
comments submitted as CBI if: your comments responsive to this document
contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated
as private; you actually treat such information as private; and your
comment is relevant or responsive to this notice. Pursuant to 49 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) 190.343, you may ask PHMSA to provide
confidential treatment to information you give to the agency by taking
the following steps: (1) mark each page of the original document
submission containing CBI as ``Confidential''; (2) send PHMSA, along
with the original document, a second copy of the original document with
the CBI deleted; and (3) explain why the information that you are
submitting is CBI. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Robert
Jagger, PHP-30, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), 2nd Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-
0001, or by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#582a373a3d2a2c7632393f3f3d2a183c372c763f372e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f98b969b9c8b8dd793989e9e9c8bb99d968dd79e968f">[email protected]</span></a>. Any materials PHMSA
receives that is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket. Alternatively, you may review
the documents in person at the street address listed above.
II. Regulatory Analysis and Notices
A. Legal Authority
This proposed rule is published under the authority of the
Secretary of Transportation set forth in the Federal Pipeline Safety
Laws (49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.) and delegated to the PHMSA Administrator
pursuant to 49 CFR 1.97.
B. Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'';
58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993)), as implemented by DOT Order 2100.6B
(``Policies and Procedures for Rulemaking''), requires agencies to
regulate in the ``most cost-effective manner,'' to make a ``reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs,'' and to develop regulations that ``impose the least burden on
society.'' DOT Order 2100.6B specifies that regulations should
generally ``not be issued unless their benefits are expected to exceed
their costs.'' In arriving at those conclusions, E.O. 12866 requires
that agencies should consider ``both quantifiable measures . . . and
qualitative measures of costs and benefits that are difficult to
quantify'' and ``maximize net benefits . . . unless a statute requires
another regulatory approach.'' E.O. 12866 also requires that ``agencies
should assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives, including the alternative of not regulating.'' DOT Order
2100.6B directs that PHMSA and other Operating Administrations must
generally choose the ``least costly regulatory alternative that
achieves the relevant objectives''
[[Page 28595]]
unless required by law or compelling safety need.
E.O. 12866 and DOT Order 2100.6B also require that PHMSA submit
``significant regulatory actions'' to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Executive Office of the
President's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. This NPRM
is a not significant regulatory action pursuant to E.O. 12866; it also
has not designated this rule as a ``major rule'' as defined by the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.).
PHMSA has complied with the requirements in E.O. 12866 as
implemented by DOT Order 2100.6B and expects that this NPRM may result
in cost savings by reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory
uncertainty for pipeline facility operators that perform coating
surveys and coating remediation activities following the installation,
repair, or replacement of pipe. Those cost savings may also result in
reduced costs for the public to whom pipeline operators generally
transfer a portion of their compliance costs. The cost savings of this
rulemaking could not be quantified.
C. Executive Orders 14192 and 14219
This NPRM is expected to be a deregulatory action pursuant to E.O.
14192 (``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation''; (90 FR 9065
(Feb. 6, 2025)). PHMSA estimates that the total costs of the NPRM on
the regulated community will be less than zero. Nor does this
rulemaking implicate any of the factors identified in section 2(a) of
E.O. 14219 (``Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the
President's `Department of Government Efficiency' Deregulatory
Initiative'') indicative that a regulation is ``unlawful . . . [or]
that undermine[s] the national interest.'' (90 FR 10583 (Feb. 25,
2025).
D. Energy-Related Executive Orders 13211, 14154, and 14156
The President has declared in E.O. 14156 (``Declaring a National
Energy Emergency''; (90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025)) a national emergency
to address America's inadequate energy development production,
transportation, refining, and generation capacity. Similarly, E.O.
14154 (``Unleashing American Energy,'' (90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025))
asserts a Federal policy to unleash American energy by ensuing access
to abundant supplies of reliable, affordable energy from (inter alia)
the removal of ``undue burden[s]'' on the identification, development,
or use of domestic energy resources such as PHMSA-jurisdictional gasses
and hazardous liquids. PHMSA finds this NPRM is consistent with each of
E.O. 14156 and E.O. 14154. This NPRM will give affected pipeline
operators regulatory certainty and cost savings from removing the
requirements related to operators documenting specific dates for
construction backfill activities and permit applications. PHMSA
therefore expects the regulatory amendments in this NPRM will in turn
increase national pipeline transportation capacity and improve pipeline
operators' ability to provide abundant, reliable, affordable natural
gas in response to residential, commercial, and industrial demand.
However, this NPRM is not a ``significant energy action'' under
E.O. 13211 (``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use''; (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)),
which requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy
Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' Because this NPRM is not
a significant action under E.O. 12866, it will not have a significant
adverse effect on supply, distribution, or energy use, and OIRA has
therefore not designated this NPRM as a significant energy action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
PHMSA analyzed this NPRM in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in E.O. 13132 (``Federalism''; 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10,
1999)) and the Presidential Memorandum (``Preemption'') published in
the Federal Register on May 22, 2009 (74 FR 24693). E.O. 13132 requires
agencies to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials in the development of regulatory policies that may have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
While this NPRM may operate to preempt some State requirements, it
would not impose any regulation that 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. Section 60104(c) of Federal Pipeline
Safety Laws prohibits certain State safety regulation of interstate
pipelines. Under Federal Pipeline Safety Laws, States that have
submitted a current certification under section 60105(a) can augment
Federal pipeline safety requirements for intrastate pipelines regulated
by PHMSA but may not approve safety requirements less stringent than
those required by Federal law. A State may also regulate an intrastate
pipeline facility that PHMSA does not regulate. The preemptive effect
of the regulatory amendments in this NPRM is limited to the minimum
level necessary to achieve the objectives of the Federal Pipeline
Safety Laws. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of
E.O. 13132 do not apply.
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
Federal agencies to conduct an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) for an NPRM subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking under the
Administrative Procedure Act unless the agency head certifies that the
proposed rule in the rulemaking will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. E.O. 13272 (``Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking''; 67 FR 53461
(Aug. 16, 2002)) obliges agencies to establish procedures promoting
compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act. DOT posts its
implementing guidance on a dedicated web page. This NPRM was developed
in accordance with E.O. 13272 and DOT implementing guidance to ensure
compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The proposed rule is
expected to reduce regulatory burdens. Therefore, PHMSA certifies this
NPRM will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
requires agencies to assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions
on State, local, and Tribal governments, and the private sector. For
any proposed rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in
the expenditure by state, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate of $100 million or more (in 1996 dollars) in any given year,
the agency must prepare, amongst other things, a written statement that
qualitatively and quantitatively assesses the costs and benefits of the
Federal mandate.
This NPRM does not impose unfunded mandates under UMRA because it
does not result in costs of $100 million or more (in 1996 dollars) per
year for either State, local, or Tribal governments, or to the private
sector.
H. National Environmental Policy Act
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.)
[[Page 28596]]
requires that Federal agencies assess and consider the impact of major
Federal actions on the human and natural environment.
PHMSA analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with NEPA and has
preliminarily determined that the rulemaking will not adversely affect
safety and therefore will not significantly affect the quality of the
human and natural environment. The public is invited to comment on the
impact of the proposed action.
I. Executive Order 13175
PHMSA analyzed this NPRM according to the principles and criteria
in E.O. 13175 (``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments''; 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000)) and DOT Order 5301.1A
(``Department of Transportation Tribal Consultation Policies and
Procedures''). E.O. 13175 requires agencies to assure meaningful and
timely input from Tribal government representatives in the development
of rules that significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities by
imposing ``substantial direct compliance costs'' or ``substantial
direct effects'' on such communities or the relationship or
distribution of power between the Federal Government and Tribes.
PHMSA assessed the impact of the NPRM and determined that it will
not significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities or Indian
Tribal governments. The rulemaking's regulatory amendments have a
broad, national scope; therefore, this NPRM will not significantly or
uniquely affect Tribal communities, much less impose substantial
compliance costs on Native American Tribal governments or mandate
Tribal action. For these reasons, PHMSA has concluded that the funding
and consultation requirements of E.O. 13175 and DOT Order 5301.1A do
not apply.
J. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 5 CFR 1320.8(d) requires that PHMSA provide
interested members of the public and affected agencies with an
opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping
requests. This NPRM will not create, amend, or rescind any existing
information collections.
K. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis
E.O. 13609 (``Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation''; 77
FR 26413 (May 4, 2012)) requires agencies consider whether the impacts
associated with significant variations between domestic and
international regulatory approaches are unnecessary or may impair the
ability of American business to export and compete internationally. In
meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation
can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that
are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation.
International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or
prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.
Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as
amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465),
prohibits Federal agencies from establishing any standards or engaging
in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. For purposes of these requirements,
Federal agencies may participate in the establishment of international
standards, so long as the standards have a legitimate domestic
objective, such as providing for safety, and do not operate to exclude
imports that meet this objective. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards.
PHMSA engages with international standards setting bodies to
protect the safety of the American public. PHMSA has assessed the
effects of the direct final rule and has determined that its regulatory
amendments will not cause unnecessary obstacles to foreign trade.
L. Cybersecurity and Executive Order 14028
E.O. 14028 (``Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity''; 86 FR 26633
(May 17, 2021)) directed the Federal Government to improve its efforts
to identify, deter, and respond to ``persistent and increasingly
sophisticated malicious cyber campaigns.'' PHMSA has considered the
effects of the NPRM and has determined that its regulatory amendments
would not materially affect the cybersecurity risk profile for pipeline
facilities.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 192
Natural gas, Pipeline safety, Pipelines.
In consideration of the foregoing, PHMSA proposes to revise 49 CFR
part 192 as follows:
PART 192--TRANSPORTATION OF NATURAL AND OTHER GAS BY PIPELINE:
MINIMUM FEDERAL SAFETY STANDARDS
0
1. The authority citation for part 192 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 185(w)(3), 49 U.S.C. 5121, 60101 et. seq.,
and 49 CFR 1.97.
0
2. Amend Sec. 192.319 by revising paragraphs (d) and (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 192.319 Installation of pipe in a ditch.
* * * * *
(d) If the construction project involves 1,000 feet or more of
continuous backfill length along the pipeline, then no later than 6
months after placing the pipeline in service, an operator must perform
an assessment to assess any coating damage and ensure the integrity of
the coating using direct current voltage gradient (DCVG) surveys,
alternative current voltage gradient (ACVG) surveys, or other
technology that provides comparable information about the integrity of
the coating. Such coating surveys must be conducted except in locations
where effective coating surveys are precluded by geographical,
technical, or safety reasons.
* * * * *
(f) An operator of an onshore steel transmission pipeline must
develop a remedial action plan within 6 months of completing the
assessment that identified the deficiency. An operator must repair any
coating damage classified as severe (voltage drop greater than 60
percent for DCVG or 70 dB[micro]V for ACVG) in accordance with section
4 of NACE SP0502 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 192.7) within 6
months of the assessment, or as soon as practicable after obtaining
necessary permits, not to exceed 6 months after the receipt of such
permits.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 192.461 by revising paragraphs (f) and (h) to read as
follows:
Sec. 192.461 External corrosion control: Protective coating
* * * * *
(f) No later than 6 months after placing a pipeline back into
service following a repair or replacement that results in 1,000 feet or
more of continuous backfill length along the pipeline, an operator must
perform an assessment to assess any coating damage and ensure the
integrity of the coating using direct current voltage gradient (DCVG)
surveys, alternating current voltage gradient (ACVG) surveys, or other
technology that provides comparable information about the integrity of
the coating. Such coating
[[Page 28597]]
surveys must be conducted except in locations where effective coating
surveys are precluded by geographical, technical, or safety reasons.
* * * * *
(h) An operator of an onshore steel transmission pipeline must
develop a remedial action plan within 6 months of completing the
assessment that identified the deficiency. The operator must repair any
coating damage classified as severe (voltage drop greater than 60
percent for DCVG or 70 dB[micro]V for ACVG) in accordance with section
4 of NACE SP0502 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 192.7) within 6
months of the assessment, or as soon as practicable after obtaining
necessary permits, not to exceed 6 months after the receipt of such
permits.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2025, under the authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Benjamin D. Kochman,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2025-12118 Filed 6-27-25; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 1, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.