Pipeline Safety: Codify Enforcement Discretion on Incidental Gathering Lines
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Pipeline Safety: Codify Enforcement Discretion on Incidental Gathering Lines
- Posted
- Jul 1, 2025
- Comment period
- Jul 1, 2025 – Sep 4, 2026
- FR Doc
- 2025-12131
- CFR
- 49 CFR Part 192
- Topics
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Position map
Who stands where on each issue?
Every non-silent position is backed by an excerpt from the comment.
Issues shown
Choose up to five.
| Organization | Codification of enforcement discretion |
|---|---|
The American Petroleum Institute, GPA Midstream Association, and the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America. Trade associationSupport The American Petroleum Institute, GPA Midstream Association, and the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America suppo |
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- Sep 2, 2025The American Petroleum Institute, GPA Midstream Association, and the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America.SupportTrade association📎 Attachment
The American Petroleum Institute, GPA Midstream Association, and the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America support the proposal to codify enforcement discretion for existing incidental gathering lines. They argue that the action provides regulatory certainty, reduces unnecessary compliance costs, and aligns with executive orders promoting energy production without compromising public safety.
Read comment → - Sep 1, 2025Anonymous AnonymousOpposeIndividual
The commenter opposes the proposed changes to Part 192.8(a)(5) regarding incidental gas gathering pipelines, arguing that the Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis (PRIA) is flawed and fails to account for public safety and environmental costs. They request that PHMSA deny the changes and instead limit any modifications to short replacements of 100 feet or less.
Read comment →
