Proposed Rule2026-08078
Administrative Rulemaking: Regulatory Procedures
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
April 24, 2026
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Abstract
PHMSA proposes to adopt regulatory amendments to align procedures governing post-issuance administrative challenges of final rules issued by its Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) with those governing post-issuance administrative challenges of final rules issued by its Office of Hazardous Materials Safety (OHMS).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 79 (Friday, April 24, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 79 (Friday, April 24, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22083-22087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-08078]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 190
[Docket No. PHMSA-2026-1555]
RIN 2137-AF63
Administrative Rulemaking: Regulatory Procedures
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PHMSA proposes to adopt regulatory amendments to align
procedures governing post-issuance administrative challenges of final
rules issued by its Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) with those
governing post-issuance administrative challenges of final rules issued
by its Office of Hazardous Materials Safety (OHMS).
DATES: Written comments on this NPRM must be submitted by June 23,
2026.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Docket Number
PHMSA-2026-1555 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.
[[Page 22084]]
For commenting instructions and additional information about
commenting, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sayler Palabrica, Transportation
Specialist, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, 202-744-
0825, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7407150d1811065a0415181516061d171534101b005a131b02"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="413220382d24336f31202d20233328222001252e356f262e37">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Discussion
PHMSA regulations governing its hazardous materials safety and
pipeline safety programs provide procedures for informal rulemaking
under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA, 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.).
Each of the informal rulemaking procedures for OHMS (at 49 CFR part
106) and OPS (at 49 CFR part 190) also provide procedural mechanisms
for post-issuance administrative challenges of PHMSA final rules.
However, those post-issuance administrative challenge procedures
differ significantly between each of PHMSA's program offices. OHMS
post-issuance administrative challenge procedures at Sec. 106.110 et
seq. contemplate a single round of post-issuance administrative
``appeal'' challenging PHMSA's issuance of an OHMS final rule; that
administrative appeal process concludes once PHMSA issues a decision on
the administrative appeal. OHMS regulations also provide for a single,
consistent review path regardless of the content of the challenged
final rule.
In contrast, OPS regulations at Sec. 190.335 et seq. contemplate
as many as two rounds of post-issuance administrative challenges to OPS
final rules: an initial ``petition for reconsideration'' for decision
by the Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety or the Chief
Counsel, potentially followed by an ``appeal'' to the PHMSA
Administrator in the event of the denial of the petition for
reconsideration. OPS procedures also contemplate different review paths
for petitions for reconsideration based on the nature of the final rule
being challenged: petitions for reconsideration of final rules
pertaining to ``procedural'' regulations are submitted to, and decided
by, the PHMSA Chief Counsel, but petitions for reconsideration of final
rules pertaining to ``substantive'' regulations are submitted to, and
decided by, the PHMSA Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety. This
distinction between ``procedural'' regulations and ``substantive''
regulations is ambiguous and provides little clarity to stakeholders as
to which PHMSA personnel will be reviewing petitions for
reconsideration.
To improve consistency between its two safety programs regarding
procedures for post-issuance administrative challenges of rulemakings,
PHMSA now proposes to amend its part 190 regulations to (1) remove
procedures contemplating second-round ``appeals'' to the PHMSA
Administrator of denials of petitions for reconsideration of OPS final
rules, and (2) consolidate the review path for all petitions for
reconsideration of OPS final rules. PHMSA also proposes to delete as
unnecessary procedures contemplating appeals to the Administrator of
denials of petitions for rulemaking pursuant to Sec. 190.333. PHMSA
would apply any new procedural requirements to final rules issued after
the effective date of a final rule in this proceeding.
Commenting Instructions: Please include the docket number PHMSA-
2026-1555 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 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 Sec.
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 Sayler Palabrica, Office of Pipeline
Safety Standards and Rulemaking Division, 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#dfacbea6b3baadf1afbeb3bebdadb6bcbe9fbbb0abf1b8b0a9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6b180a12070e19451b0a070a091902080a2b0f041f450c041d">[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="http://www.regulations.gov">http://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 Analyses and Notices
A. Legal Authority
This proposed rule is published under the authority of the
Secretary of Transportation as 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. The amendments adopted herein affect
provisions in part 190 governing PHMSA's informal rulemaking procedures
and therefore pertain to ``rules of agency organization, procedure, or
practice'' that could be published as a final rule without notice and
comment and with an immediate effective date as permitted by 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). However, as a matter of discretion, PHMSA has decided to
first publish this notice of proposed rulemaking and provide an
opportunity for public comment before adopting a final rule.
B. Statutory Requirement and Executive Order 12866
The Federal Pipeline Safety Laws (49 U.S.C. 60102(b)) require that
PHMSA prepare a risk assessment that identifies the costs and benefits
associated with a proposed regulatory change. E.O. 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, as implemented by DOT Order 2100.6B (``Policies
and Procedures for Rulemaking'') and DOT Order 2100.7 (``Ensuring
Reliance upon Sound Economic Analysis in Department of
[[Page 22085]]
Transportation Policies, Programs, and Activities''), 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.'' 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'' unless required by law or compelling
safety need. DOT Order 2100.6B also specifies that regulations should
generally ``not be issued unless their benefits are expected to exceed
their costs.'' DOT Order 2100.7 requires that ``all rulemaking
activities shall be based on sound economic principles and analysis
supported by rigorous cost-benefit requirement.''
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 not a significant regulatory action pursuant to E.O. 12866; OMB 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 procedural and analytical requirements
in E.O. 12866 as implemented by DOT Order 2100.6B and DOT Order 2100.7,
as well as the requirements in 49 U.S.C. 60102(b), and preliminarily
determined that this proposed rule would not impose new burdens as it
only streamlines a legal process and does not impose new requirements
on pipeline operators. PHMSA also preliminarily determined that the
proposed rule would not have any adverse safety effects for the same
reason.
C. Executive Orders 14192 and 14219
This proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, is expected to be a
deregulatory action pursuant to E.O. 14192, Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation. PHMSA estimates that the total costs of the rule
on the regulated community will be de minimis, as the non-substantive
changes of this rulemaking do not impose any new requirements on
pipeline operators, and the changes therein should improve the clarity
and compliance with PHMSA regulations. Nor does this proposed rule
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.''
D. Energy-Related Executive Orders 13211, 14154, and 14156
The President has declared in E.O. 14156, Declaring a National
Energy Emergency, a National emergency to address America's inadequate
energy development production, transportation, refining, and generation
capacity. Similarly, E.O. 14154, Unleashing American Energy, 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 gases and
hazardous liquids. PHMSA preliminarily finds this proposed rule is
consistent with each of E.O. 14156 and E.O. 14154. The provisions of
this proposed rule are non-substantive and will not impose new
requirements on pipeline operators.
This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use, which requires Federal agencies to
prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any ``significant energy
action.'' Because this proposed rule is not a significant action under
E.O. 12866, it will not have a significant adverse effect on supply,
distribution, or energy use; OIRA has therefore not designated this
proposed rule as a significant energy action.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
PHMSA analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in E.O. 13132, Federalism, and the Presidential
Memorandum (``Preemption'') published in the Federal Register on May
22, 2009. E.O. 13132 requires agencies to assure 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.''
Though the proposed rule 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 the Federal Pipeline Safety Laws prohibits certain State
safety regulation of interstate pipelines. Under the 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
proposed rule 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 (RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
Federal agencies to conduct an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) for a proposed rule subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking
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, obliges agencies to establish procedures
promoting compliance with the RFA. DOT posts its implementing guidance
on a dedicated web page.\1\ This proposed rule was developed in
accordance with E.O. 13272 and DOT implementing guidance to ensure
compliance with the RFA and that the potential impacts of the
rulemaking on small entities has been properly considered. PHMSA does
not expect any operator will incur significant costs from the
regulatory amendments proposed here, which only affect procedures
governing petitions for reconsideration of final rules--a procedural
mechanism few operators
[[Page 22086]]
utilize, and which entails relatively low costs. Therefore, PHMSA
certifies the proposed rule (if finalized) will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ DOT, Rulemaking Requirements Concerning Small Entities,
<a href="https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/rulemaking-requirements-concerning-small-entities">https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/rulemaking-requirements-concerning-small-entities</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 or final 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 ($203 million in
2024 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 proposed rule 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
PHMSA has analyzed this proposed rule pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has
preliminarily determined that it is categorically excluded under 23 CFR
771.117(c)(20), which applies to the promulgation of rules,
regulations, and directives. Under section 9 of DOT Order 5610.1D
(``DOT's Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts''), PHMSA may
apply a categorical exclusion (CE) established in another Operating
Administration's (OA) procedures. PHMSA followed the requirements
outlined in DOT Order 5610.1D to apply the Federal Highway
Administration's (FHWA) CE to this proposed deregulatory action. PHMSA
does not anticipate any adverse environmental impacts from this
proposed rule, and PHMSA has determined no unusual circumstances are
present under Sec. 771.117(b). PHMSA is soliciting comments on the
environmental and safety impacts of the proposed rule. Following the
public comment period, if determined appropriate, PHMSA will prepare a
Categorical Exclusion Determination memo to be posted on PHMSA's
website.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See PHMSA, Environmental Compliance-Implementing Procedures,
<a href="https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/planning-and-analytics/environmental-analysis-and-compliance/implementing-procedures">https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/planning-and-analytics/environmental-analysis-and-compliance/implementing-procedures</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Executive Order 13175
PHMSA analyzed this proposed rule according to the principles and
criteria in E.O. 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments, 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 proposed rule 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 proposed rule 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 rulemaking 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,
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 proposed rule and has determined that its proposed
regulatory amendments will not cause unnecessary obstacles to foreign
trade.
L. Cybersecurity and Executive Order 14028
E.O. 14028, Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity, directs 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 proposed rule and
has determined that its proposed regulatory amendments will not
materially affect the cybersecurity risk profile for pipeline
facilities.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 190
Administrative practice and procedure, Penalties, Pipeline safety.
In consideration of the foregoing, PHMSA proposes to revise 49 CFR
part 190 as follows:
PART 190--PIPELINE SAFETY ENFORCEMENT AND REGULATORY PROCEDURES
0
1. The authority citation for part 190 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(b); 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq.
0
2. Revise Sec. 190.335 to read as follows:
Sec. 190.335 Petitions for reconsideration.
(a) Except as provided in Sec. 190.339(d), any interested person
may petition PHMSA for reconsideration of any regulation issued under
this part. The petition must be received not later than
[[Page 22087]]
30 days after publication of the rule in the Federal Register.
Petitions filed after that time will be considered as petitions filed
under Sec. 190.331. The petition must contain a brief statement of the
complaint and an explanation as to why compliance with the rule is not
practicable, is unreasonable, or is not in the public interest.
(b) If the petitioner requests the consideration of additional
facts, the petitioner must state the reason they were not presented to
PHMSA within the prescribed time.
(c) PHMSA does not consider repetitious petitions.
(d) Unless PHMSA otherwise provides, the filing of a petition under
this section does not stay the effectiveness of the rule.
0
3. Revise Sec. 190.337 to read as follows:
Sec. 190.337 Proceedings on petitions for reconsideration.
(a) PHMSA may grant or deny, in whole or in part, any petition for
reconsideration without further proceedings, except where a grant of
the petition would result in issuance of a new final rule. In the event
PHMSA determines to reconsider any regulation, a final decision on
reconsideration may be issued without further proceedings, or an
opportunity to submit comment or information and data as deemed
appropriate, may be provided. PHMSA may consolidate petitions for
reconsideration relating to the same rules.
(b) It is the policy of PHMSA to issue notice of the action taken
on a petition for reconsideration within 90 days after the date on
which the regulation in question is published in the Federal Register,
unless it is found impracticable to take action within that time. In
cases where it is so found and the delay beyond that period is expected
to be substantial, notice of that fact and the date by which it is
expected that action is issued to the petitioner and published in the
Federal Register.
Sec. 190.338 [Removed]
0
4. Remove Sec. 190.338.
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 22, 2026, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Paul J. Roberti,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2026-08078 Filed 4-23-26; 8:45 am]
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 April 24, 2026.
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.