Administrative Rulemaking: Regulatory Procedures

The Pipeline Safety Trust, a nonprofit watchdog organization, provides mixed feedback on the proposed rulemaking. They support streamlining the petition review track but oppose the elimination of the second-tier appeal to the PHMSA Administrator, while also requesting that the 90-day notice for petitions be made a binding obligation.

The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) supports the proposed changes to PHMSA's administrative rulemaking procedures, specifically the elimination of the administrative appeals process. However, they recommend that the final rule designate a specific official (the Administrator) as the decision-maker for reconsideration petitions and establish a firm 90-day timeline for agency action.

The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA), a trade association representing the majority of U.S. interstate natural gas transmission pipeline companies, supports the proposed rule to streamline post-issuance administrative procedures. They argue that the proposal creates a unified, consistent review process for both pipeline and hazardous materials safety rules while maintaining adequate due process opportunities.

The commenter argues against altering the challenge and appeals process, expressing a desire to maintain existing procedures to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable. They cite specific damage figures and mortality rates from air pollution as justification for keeping the current regulatory framework in place.