Pipeline Safety: Adjustment to OPID Notifications for Construction

The American Petroleum Institute (API) supports the proposal to increase monetary thresholds for Operator Identification Number (OPID) notifications and establish an annual inflation-indexing mechanism. They argue that current thresholds are outdated due to rising construction costs and that the proposed changes will align regulations with current industry costs while providing administrative benefits to both the industry and PHMSA.

The National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives (NAPSR), an organization of state agency pipeline safety managers, supports the proposed revisions to update monetary thresholds for operator notifications. They argue that the changes are consistent with other PHMSA reporting requirements and will not have any adverse effects on safety.

The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA), a trade association representing interstate natural gas pipeline companies, supports the proposed increase in monetary thresholds for Operator Identification Number (OPID) notifications. They argue that the current thresholds are outdated due to inflation and that the proposed changes will reduce unnecessary administrative burdens without compromising pipeline safety.

The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) supports the proposal to increase and index the monetary thresholds for Operator Identification Number (OPID) notifications to better align with current construction costs. They argue that these changes will reduce administrative burdens on operators and allow PHMSA to focus on higher-risk projects, while also suggesting specific refinements for LNG facilities.

The Pipeline Safety Trust, a nonprofit watchdog organization, opposes the proposed rule because it argues that the inflation adjustments used to increase construction notification thresholds are not supported by accurate price indexes. They contend that reducing construction notifications will undermine PHMSA's safety oversight and lead to preventable pipeline incidents, which far outweigh the minimal cost savings proposed by the agency.

South Bow Corporation supports the proposed rulemaking because it reduces redundant administrative burdens for both the company and PHMSA. They argue that the current notification requirements for projects already reviewed during routine inspections are unnecessary.

Maxilia C. Desir, a student and former state legislator, opposes the proposed rule because it reduces federal oversight and creates "blind spots" for pipeline construction. She argues that increasing notification thresholds disproportionately harms vulnerable and minority communities by facilitating "fossil fuel racism" and increasing safety risks without adequate environmental justice analysis.