Pipeline Safety: Rationalize Special Permit Conditions

The Pipeline Safety Trust, a non-profit watchdog organization, opposes the proposed rulemaking because it seeks to limit PHMSA's authority to impose safety conditions on special permits. They argue the proposal is arbitrary and capricious, undermines pipeline safety, and fails to account for the interconnected risks of pipeline operations.

The commenter opposes the proposed changes to Part 190.341(d)(2), arguing that PHMSA should maintain its regulatory discretion to impose safety conditions, especially in high-population areas. They challenge PHMSA's claim that current outcomes are "uncertain and inconsistent," requesting specific evidence and data to justify the proposed changes.

An individual commenter opposes the proposed changes to Part 190.341(d)(2), arguing that the proposal lacks supporting facts and would limit PHMSA's discretion in ensuring public safety. The commenter expresses concern that the changes could undermine safety by restricting the agency's ability to impose necessary permit conditions or by allowing unproven technologies in sensitive areas.

The commenter opposes the proposed changes to Part 190.341(d)(2) because they believe the limitations on permit conditions will increase public risk from pipeline leaks and failures. They argue that PHMSA has historically used permit conditions effectively to address safety and operational needs and criticize the agency for failing to specify which conditions would be limited.

The commenter opposes the proposed changes to Part 190.341(d)(2), arguing that limiting PHMSA's discretion in granting special permits would undermine public safety. They contend that the proposal would prevent the agency from imposing necessary safety conditions on unproven technologies in high-consequence areas and would stifle pipeline safety innovation.