SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Discussion

Through this NPRM, PHMSA is proposing to revise requirements in 49 CFR 192.634(a) and 195.418(a) for making rupture-mitigation valves (RMV) and alternative equivalent technologies operational from 14 days to 90 days. Section 192.634(a) currently requires gas transmission pipeline operators to make “RMVs or alternative equivalent technologies . . . operational within 14 days of placing the new or replaced pipeline segment into service.” Section 195.418(a) similarly requires hazardous liquid and carbon dioxide pipeline operators to make RMVs or alternative equivalent technologies operational within the same 14-day deadline.

In response to DOT's request for information (90 FR 14593 (Apr. 3, 2025)), the American Gas Association ( printed page 22112) (AGA) and American Public Gas Association (APGA) asked PHMSA to update § 192.634(a) by increasing the timeframe required by the current regulation, claiming the 14-day timeline is “disproportionately burdensome to operators relative to the safety value.” ^[1] PHMSA agrees with AGA and APGA that the current 14-day timeframe can be challenging for operators to meet, especially considering extenuating circumstances related to inclement weather and operational challenges synchronizing these valves in a supervisory control and data acquisition system. PHMSA also notes that, though natural gas pipeline operators requested this change to be made specifically for the Part 192 regulations, hazardous liquid pipeline operators regulated under Part 195 face similar challenges of issues during construction or project management.

Operators may require more time to verify operation of these appurtenances due to construction issues, the procurement and installation of telemetry equipment, adverse weather, and other potential issues. PHMSA expects, however, that most operators will complete this requirement sooner than 90 days. For these reasons, PHMSA is proposing to revise §§ 192.634(a) and 195.418(a) to increase the timeframe for making RMVs or alternative equivalent technologies operational from 14 to 90 days. PHMSA believes that a 90-day timeframe is appropriate for the reasons stated above and consistent with other deadlines in Parts 192 and 195.

Commenting Instructions: Please include the docket number PHMSA-2026-1553 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 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.

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 https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.dot.gov/​privacy.

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 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 Brooks Tate, 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 brooks.tate@dot.gov. 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 http://www.regulations.gov. 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. Statutory Requirement and Executive Order 12866

The 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 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” unless required by law or compelling safety need. DOT Order 2100.7 requires that “all rulemaking activities shall be based on sound economic principles and analysis supported by rigorous cost-benefit requirements.”

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 proposed rule is a not 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 will result in some cost savings by reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty for natural gas and hazardous liquid facility operators by revising disproportionately burdensome compliance timelines. The ( printed page 22113) accompanying Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis provides detailed estimates of the cost savings to operators of the increased timeframe for making RMVs operational. PHMSA estimates that the changes in the proposed rule would result in cost savings of $20,877 annually. PHMSA expects these cost savings may also result in reduced costs for the public to whom pipeline operators generally transfer a portion of their compliance costs. PHMSA has also preliminarily determined that the proposed rule will not have adverse effects on safety.

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 proposed rule 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.”

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 proposed rule will give affected pipeline operators relief from unnecessarily stringent compliance timeframes. PHMSA therefore expects the regulatory amendments in this proposed rule will in turn increase national pipeline transportation capacity and improve pipeline operators' ability to provide abundant, reliable, affordable natural gas and hazardous liquid in response to residential, commercial, and industrial demand.

However, 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.

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.”

While the proposed rule may (when finalized) 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.^[2] This proposed rule was developed in accordance with E.O. 13272 and DOT implementing guidance to ensure compliance with the RFA. The proposed rule is expected to reduce regulatory burdens by extending compliance timelines and reducing notification requirements for operators making rupture-mitigation valves operational. The changes proposed here are not expected to impose additional burdens on any operator. Therefore, PHMSA certifies the proposed rule (if finalized) 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 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. PHMSA does not expect the proposed rule will 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.) 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 issues this draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) because it 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. As ( printed page 22114) discussed above, industry stakeholders noted that the current 14-day timeline for RMV operability is impracticable; the extended timeline—which PHMSA expects most operators will satisfy well in advance of the 90-day deadline—accounts for the real-world challenges of integrating complex, safety-critical equipment into a pipeline's operations. The public is invited to comment on the impact of the proposed action.

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. Section 192.634 and 195.418 require operators to notify PHMSA to request an extension if a rupture-mitigation valve or alternative equivalent technology cannot be made operational within 14 days of installation. PHMSA proposes to revise §§ 192.634(a) and 195.418(a) to increase this timeframe from 14 to 90 days resulting in a 90 percent decrease in the number of requests to extend the operational deadline. The burden estimate for this information collection will be revised to reflect this decrease.

PHMSA will submit the following information collection request to OMB for approval based on the adjustments in this proposed rule. These information collection requirements are contained in the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations at 49 CFR parts 192 and 195. The following information is provided for this information collection: (1) Title of the information collection; (2) OMB control number; (3) Current expiration date; (4) Type of request; (5) Abstract of the information collection activity; (6) Description of affected public; (7) Estimate of total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden; and (8) Frequency of collection. The information collection will be revised as follows:

Title: Rupture Mitigation Valve Notification Requirements.

OMB Control Number: 2137-0638.

Current Expiration Date: 11/30/2025.

Type of Request: Revision.

Abstract:49 CFR 192.634 and 49 CFR 195.418 require operators who elect to use alternative equivalent technology to notify the Office of Pipeline Safety at least 90 days in advance of use. An operator choosing this option must include a technical and safety evaluation, including design, construction, and operating procedures for the alternative equivalent technology with the notification.

Operators must notify PHMSA if a rupture-mitigation valve cannot be made operational within 90 days of installation. Operators must also notify PHMSA if a valve cannot be repaired or replaced within 12 months.

An operator may seek exemption from certain regulatory requirements by notifying PHMSA in certain instances. An operator may plan to leave a rupture-mitigation valve open for more than 30 minutes following a rupture identification if the operator demonstrates to PHMSA, that closing a rupture mitigation valve, or alternative equivalent technology, would be detrimental to public safety. Likewise, for hazardous liquid pipeline segments in a non-high consequence area (HCA) or a non-HCA could-affect segment, an operator may request exemption from certain requirements if it can demonstrate to PHMSA that installing an otherwise-required rupture-mitigation valve, or alternative equivalent technology, would be economically, technically, or operationally infeasible.

Affected Public: Operators of PHMSA-regulated pipelines.

Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden:

Estimated number of responses: 435.

Estimated annual burden hours: 2,215.

Frequency of collection: On occasion.

Requests for copies of this information collection should be directed to Angela Hill at angela.hill@dot.gov.

Comments are invited on:

(a) The need for the proposed collection of information for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the revised collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques.

Send comments directly to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Desk Officer for the Department of Transportation, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. Comments should be submitted on or prior to June 23, 2026.

K. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis

E.O. 13609, Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation, requires agencies to 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 to 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 ( printed page 22115) 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, to deter, and to 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 would not materially affect the cybersecurity risk profile for pipeline facilities.

For the reasons set forth above, PHMSA proposes to amend 49 CFR parts 192 and 195 as follows:

1. The authority citation for 49 CFR Part 192 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 185(w)(3), 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60101 et seq., and 49 CFR 1.97.

2. In § 192.634, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

3. The authority citation for Part 195 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 185(w)(3), 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60101 et seq., and 49 CFR 1.97.

4. In § 195.418, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

91 FR 22111