June 2025 Vol. 80 No. 6
Washington Watch
PHMSA publishes advisory bulletin on pipeline safety
STEPHEN BARLAS, Washington D.C. editor
Perhaps in an effort to convince Congress to lay off, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) just issued an advisory bulletin to promote the implementation of pipeline safety management systems (PSMS) by regulated pipeline owners and operators.
During hearings last February, in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, aimed at developing the contents of a new pipeline safety bill, Bill Caram, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust, said widespread adoption of pipeline safety management systems still eludes the pipeline industry. “Congress could make a meaningful difference in pipeline safety by directing PHMSA to take steps towards widespread industry adoption,” he added.
One month later, at the end of March, PHMSA published its advisory bulletin. It said, “PHMSA encourages pipeline operators to develop and to implement PSMS programs using a framework such as the one detailed in American Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended Practice (RP) 1173.”
In announcing the initiative, PHMSA Acting Administrator Ben Kochman said, “Safety Management Systems bring about a much-needed evolution of internal pipeline safety management structures, policies and procedures that will ultimately lead us to achieve our goal of zero incidents. We encourage all regulated pipeline owners and operators to fully embrace the continuous improvement and enhanced safety benefits that come with implementing a pipeline SMS.”
The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA) welcomed the PHMSA advisory bulletin. Amy Andryszak, president & CEO of INGAA, said since the publication of RP1173, INGAA and the INGAA Foundation have promoted the implementation of PSMS through annual workshops and the sharing of leading practices among members.
She added, “Our members acknowledge that improving safety performance is both essential and an ongoing journey, and we appreciate the support of Secretary Duffy and Acting Administrator Kochman in advancing safety management systems.” Duffy is Sean Duffy, secretary of the Department of Transportation, the parent department for the PHMSA.
In July 2024, the Pipeline Safety Management Systems (Pipeline SMS) Industry Team published its latest annual report, for year 2023. It said, for the third year in a row, nearly 85 percent of transmission and gathering mileage participated in voluntary pipeline SMS implementation. That team is made up of members of U.S. and Canadian oil and gas pipeline trade associations. That report did not comment on the extent of the systems put in place, as to format and internal enforcement.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued an alert in July 2024 that said “although PSMS have been adopted by operators representing 85 percent of industry pipeline mileage, many operators, particularly smaller operators, have not yet adopted PSMS.”
More than one-half of the smallest category of operators reported that their PSMS efforts best fit the “stalled” characterization. NTSB added, despite the 85 percent adoption number, the pipeline industry “continues to have accidents that could have been prevented or the consequences more effectively mitigated had risks been more thoroughly identified and addressed.”
Safety management system adoptions by pipelines picked up speed after tragic pipeline accidents more than 15 years ago. Those accidents led to the NTSB issuing a recommendation that pipelines adopt SMS, which led to the American Petroleum Institute issuing API RR 1173 in July 2015.
In January 2024, NTSB issued Safety Recommendation P-24-002 to PHMSA in response to a pipeline release that occurred on Oct. 1, 2021, in San Pedro Bay, Calif. In that safety recommendation, NTSB advised PHMSA to issue “an advisory bulletin to all Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration-regulated pipeline owners and operators promoting the benefits of pipeline safety management systems and asking them to develop and implement such a system based on American Petroleum Institute Recommended Practice 1173.”
NTSB stated that “the implementation of a robust PSMS program would have helped” the operator of the ruptured pipeline “comply with regulations, ensure employees were following company procedures, and better prepare personnel to respond and react to the conditions found during this release.”
EPA considers changes to pipeline emission regs
Now that Congress has passed a resolution of disapproval canceling the methane emissions tax on interstate gas pipelines, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has its sights set on two more pipeline regulations, which it wants to either modify or cancel on its own authority. Those are regulations on greenhouse gas emission reporting, and emission standards and compliance schedules for the control of methane and other emissions. The two regulations are, with regard to methane emissions, intertwined.
“Many of the administration’s environmental orders and actions have been, or likely will be, challenged in court, and it is uncertain how the courts will view these efforts,” wrote Elizabeth Malone, an attorney with Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP, in a blog post about the two EPA pipeline deregulatory actions. “The long-term effect of these orders and deregulatory actions, therefore, remains to be seen.”
In announcing the deregulatory efforts, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said, “Oil and gas standards promulgated by EPA must be rooted in the rule of law, not be used as a weapon to shut down development and manufacturing in the United States. EPA is reconsidering these regulations to ensure they do not prevent America from unleashing energy dominance and continuing our trajectory as a leader in clean energy and emissions reductions.”
The greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting regulation (subpart W in the agency’s Clean Air lexicon), enacted in 2010, requires interstate gas pipelines to report GHG data and other relevant information to the EPA. Much of that data is public. INGAA said changes to the GHG reporting rule proposed by the EPA in 2022 (reproposed in 2023 and then made final in May 2024) would have a “significant impact” on the industry. The agency recently extended the reporting deadline for year 2024 from March 31, 2025, to May 30, 2025
The other upcoming regulatory change is to the March 2024 final rule (here referred to 0000b/c) aimed at reducing methane emissions at natural gas industry sites by imposing new controls on such things as storage vessels, pneumatic controllers and requirements for zero emission controllers, dry seals for centrifugal and rod packing of reciprocating compressors.
EPA issued a notice of “reconsideration” of 0000b/c soon after President Trump took office. That was based on a petition for review submitted the American Petroleum Institute in April 2024. API was contesting a very narrow slice of the final rule relating to vent gas net heating value (NHV) continuous monitoring requirements and alternative performance test (sampling demonstration) option for flares and enclosed combustion devices.
Then on Feb. 28, 2025, API wrote to the EPA saying, “Upon review of the changes proposed in this action, we have found that EPA only partially addressed our concerns and should make additional changes to fully address these issues and ensure the final rule is technically feasible and implementable.”
EPA’s upcoming changes to the methane emissions rule may, in the end, not be all that important. Regarding enforcement of control violations, EPA says it is also reining in the Mitigating Climate Change enforcement program, which began under the Biden administration and included natural gas facility inspections as one of its three areas of emphasis.
In FY 2024, EPA concluded 19 oil and gas enforcement cases, resulting in emissions reductions of over 829,000 metric tons per year (tpy) of carbon dioxide equivalent methane and over 33,000 metric tpy VOCs and imposed almost $72 million in civil penalties. Most of those appeared to be violations of gas processing or production facilities.
Comments