Document ID: PHMSA-2013-0255-0216
Agency: phmsa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Pipeline Safety: Requirement of Valve Installation and Minimum Rupture Detection Standards; Technical Corrections
Posted Date: 2023-08-01T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 146 (Tuesday, August 1, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50056-50063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15904]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 192 and 195

[Docket No. PHMSA-2013-0255; Amdt. Nos. 192-134, 195-106]
RIN 2137-AF06

Pipeline Safety: Requirement of Valve Installation and Minimum 
Rupture Detection Standards: Technical Corrections

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Correcting amendments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing editorial and technical corrections 
clarifying the regulations promulgated in its April 8, 2022, final rule 
titled ``Pipeline Safety: Requirement of Valve Installation and Minimum 
Rupture Detection Standards'' for certain gas, hazardous liquid, and 
carbon dioxide pipelines. The final rule also codifies the results of 
judicial review of that final rule.

DATES: These corrections are effective as of August 1, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Technical questions: Steve Nanney, Senior Technical Advisor, by 
telephone at 713-272-2855.
    General information: Robert Jagger, Senior Transportation 
Specialist, by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Corrections

    On April 8, 2022, PHMSA published a final rule titled ``Pipeline 
Safety: Requirement of Valve Installation and Minimum Rupture Detection 
Standards'' \1\ (final rule) amending the Federal Pipeline Safety 
Regulations (49 CFR parts 190 through 199) to, among other provisions, 
require the installation of rupture-mitigation valves (RMV) or 
alternative equivalent technologies and establish minimum performance 
standards for the operation of those valves to mitigate the public 
safety and environmental consequences of pipeline ruptures. The final 
rule became effective on October 5, 2022. This document identifies 
several editorial and technical corrections clarifying those 
regulations, as set forth below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 87 FR 20940 (Apr. 8, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final rule added a new Sec.  192.179(e) requiring the 
installation of rupture-mitigation valves (RMV) on certain onshore gas 
pipeline segments 6 inches or greater in diameter. The paragraph 
included an exemption for those pipelines in Class 1 or Class 2 
locations where the potential impact radius (PIR) of the pipeline is 
150 feet or less. However, a comma was inadvertently left in between 
``Class 1'' and ``or Class 2 locations,'' which led some readers to 
interpret that all pipelines in Class 1 locations were exempt from the 
RMV installation requirements, in addition to those pipelines in Class 
2 locations with a PIR of 150 feet or less. As the preamble of the 
final rule explains (see, e.g., 87 FR 20942, 20972), the exemption was 
meant to apply to pipelines with a PIR of 150 feet or less in either 
Class 1 locations or Class 2 locations. Therefore, PHMSA is correcting 
that regulatory text in this document by removing the comma, 
restructuring the sentence for clarity, and adding ``either'' before 
the reference to Class 1 and Class 2. PHMSA is also making a conforming 
change to Sec.  192.179(f), which contained similar language and will 
reflect the same regulatory intent.
    Additionally, PHMSA is also correcting Sec.  192.179(e) and (f) by 
removing a potentially confusing cross-

[[Page 50057]]

reference. At both Sec.  192.179(e) and (f), the regulatory text states 
that, for applicable pipelines, ``all RMVs and alternative equivalent 
technologies installed pursuant to [these] paragraphs must meet the 
requirements of Sec. Sec.  192.634 and 192.636.'' The requirement for 
valve installation under paragraphs (e) and (f) of Sec.  192.179 was 
intended to apply to pipelines in all class locations and regardless of 
a pipeline's high-consequence area (HCA) status, as applicable. 
However, paragraph (a) of Sec.  192.634 states that section is only 
applicable to certain pipelines located in HCAs or in Class 3 or Class 
4 locations. Therefore, with the cross-reference to Sec.  192.634 in 
Sec.  192.179, it may be unclear as to what installation requirements 
pipelines in non-HCA Class 1 or Class 2 locations must follow. 
Accordingly, in this document, PHMSA is deleting the cross-references 
to Sec.  192.634 from the valve installation requirements at Sec.  
192.179(e) and (f) so that it is clear that all new pipelines, 
regardless of HCA status or class location, must install RMVs in 
accordance with Sec.  192.179. This change does not otherwise impact 
the additional requirements at Sec.  192.634 specific to certain 
pipelines located in HCAs or in Class 3 or Class 4 locations.
    The final rule also added a new Sec.  192.610 that established the 
valve spacing requirements certain gas pipeline operators must follow 
when a class location change occurs. Paragraph (a) of Sec.  192.610, by 
its reference to ``transmission,'' provides these requirements apply to 
class location changes on onshore gas transmission pipelines. In 
contrast, paragraph (b), as written, did not include the reference to 
``transmission'' that would limit application of that paragraph in the 
same manner as paragraph (a). As a result, some readers were confused 
regarding whether the provisions in paragraph (b) were intended to 
apply to different pipelines than those subject to paragraph (a). PHMSA 
did not intend for paragraphs (a) and (b) to apply to different 
pipelines. Therefore, PHMSA is amending paragraph (b) to add a 
reference to ``transmission'' mirroring that in paragraph (a), thereby 
clarifying those provisions will have the same scope of application.
    In Sec.  192.634, PHMSA notes that there was an ``and'' omitted 
from paragraph (b)(3) that could potentially cause confusion. In this 
document, PHMSA is correcting this error by inserting the word ``and'' 
following the comma after the references to Sec. Sec.  192.18 and 
192.179 and the word ``develop.''
    When drafting the final rule, PHMSA created a new Sec.  192.636 
that contained the operational requirements for RMVs. The notice of 
proposed rulemaking \2\ (NPRM) had proposed these requirements in Sec.  
192.634, which also contained design and installation requirements for 
pipelines in Class 3 locations, Class 4 locations, and HCAs 
specifically. In the final rule, PHMSA moved the majority of the 
operational requirements, including those for rupture identification, 
valve shut-off time, and flow modeling for automatic shut-off valves 
(ASVs), into the new Sec.  192.636, so that it was clear that these 
operational requirements applied to all RMVs. However, in the final 
rule, PHMSA inadvertently neglected to relocate from Sec.  192.634 into 
the new Sec.  192.636 one operational requirement it had proposed in 
the NPRM for the manual operation of valves upon identification of a 
rupture. Therefore, PHMSA is correcting that oversight in this 
correction document by moving Sec.  192.634(c) into Sec.  192.636 at a 
new paragraph (h). The requirements at Sec.  192.634 are otherwise 
unchanged. PHMSA is also adding to that relocated language each of (1) 
in the first sentence, a cross-reference to the RMV installation 
requirement and valve shut-off requirement at Sec.  192.634, and (2) in 
the last sentence, a reference to Sec.  192.636(c) (governing RMV 
operation beyond the 30-minute default timeline set forth in Sec.  
192.636(b)) that had been inadvertently omitted from the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 85 FR 7162 (Feb. 6, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA also in Sec.  195.258(e) mistakenly provided that operators 
could use a ``manual compressor station valve'' at a continuously 
manned station as an alternative equivalent technology. As hazardous 
liquid pipelines have pump stations, and not compressor stations, this 
phrasing could cause confusion. Accordingly, in this document, PHMSA is 
correcting this at Sec.  195.258(e) by revising the phrase ``manual 
compressor station valve'' to read ``manual pump station valve.''
    At Sec.  195.402(c)(5)(ii) of the final rule, PHMSA uses the term 
``incident'' when discussing the identification and implementation of 
preventive and mitigative measures following the analyses of ruptures 
and RMV valve closures on hazardous liquid pipelines. As ``incident'' 
is a defined term in part 192 and not part 195, PHMSA believes there 
could be some potential confusion regarding the requirements of that 
paragraph. Accordingly, in this document, PHMSA is revising the term 
``incident'' at Sec.  195.402(c)(5)(ii) to read ``accident'' to be 
consistent with part 195 terminology.
    PHMSA established a new Sec.  195.417 in the final rule to describe 
a ``notification of potential rupture'' for hazardous liquid and carbon 
dioxide pipelines. The introductory text of paragraph (a) of that 
section contains an error that ``a notification of a potential rupture 
``means refers'' to the notification to [. . .].'' In this document, 
PHMSA is correcting that typographical error to read ``a notification 
of potential rupture means the notification to [. . .].'' Additionally, 
PHMSA noted that the regulatory text in that section lacked an explicit 
reference to the uncontrolled release of carbon dioxide in addition to 
hazardous liquids. PHMSA explained in the final rule that, in the 
interest of convenience, it understood references to ``hazardous 
liquid'' within the preamble discussion of the final rule's regulatory 
amendments to refer to both carbon dioxide and hazardous liquids. See 
87 FR 20940 at n. 1. Consistent with that approach, most of the 
regulatory language amended by the final rule explicitly extended the 
final rule's RMV installation and operation requirements to both 
hazardous liquid pipelines and carbon dioxide pipelines; however, PHMSA 
inadvertently omitted including explicit reference to carbon dioxide 
within Sec.  195.417's elaboration on the ``notification of potential 
rupture.'' Therefore, PHMSA has revised both the introductory text of 
paragraph (a) and paragraph (a)(3), where appropriate, to clarify that 
a ``notification of potential rupture'' can be triggered by one or more 
of the indicia of a potential unintentional or uncontrolled release of 
either hazardous liquids or carbon dioxide.
    Similarly, in Sec.  195.418, paragraph (a) states that the 
requirements of the section apply to both hazardous liquid and carbon 
dioxide pipelines. After publication of the final rule, PHMSA noticed 
that paragraph (b)(3) of the section, ``laterals,'' did not 
specifically mention ``carbon dioxide'' when discussing the commodity 
volumes that factor into the shut-off segment volume. Therefore, to 
clarify the fact that carbon dioxide laterals are also applicable to 
the requirements of paragraph (b)(3), PHMSA has inserted the term 
``carbon dioxide'' where appropriate.
    Prior to the final rule publishing, Sec.  195.420(b) stated that 
``each operator shall, at intervals not exceeding 7\1/2\ months, but at 
least twice each calendar year, inspect each mainline valve to 
determine that it is functioning properly.'' In the NPRM \3\ for the 
final

[[Page 50058]]

rule, PHMSA essentially retained this requirement and added that 
operators must partially operate valves installed in accordance with 
Sec.  195.258(c) and RMVs, as they were defined under proposed Sec.  
195.418. However, in the final rule, the word ``mainline'' was removed 
from paragraph (b), which then caused the paragraph to require that 
``each operator must, at least twice each calendar year but at 
intervals not exceeding 7\1/2\ months, inspect each valve to determine 
that it is functioning properly.'' PHMSA understands that removing the 
word ``mainline'' from those requirements could be interpreted to mean 
that PHMSA expects all valves to be inspected and maintained at the 
intervals specified within that paragraph, even valves such as those 
within pump stations. It was never PHMSA's intent to expand the valve 
maintenance requirement to all valves, and this is reflected throughout 
both the discussion in the preamble of the final rule and in the Liquid 
Pipeline Advisory Committee (LPAC) discussion and voting, where such an 
expansion is not contemplated. Therefore, in this document, PHMSA is 
correcting this omission by reinserting the word ``mainline'' in the 
requirements of Sec.  195.420(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 85 FR 7162 (Feb. 6, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA also revised the valve maintenance requirements at Sec.  
195.420(b) to include specific provisions for RMVs. More specifically, 
PHMSA added RMV-specific requirements where operators are required to 
partially operate each RMV or alternative equivalent technology as a 
part of the requirement for operators to inspect each valve at least 
twice per calendar year. The requirement continues to state that 
``operators are not required to close the valve fully during the drill 
[. . .].'' PHMSA notes that, as distinguishable response time drills 
requirements for manually or locally operated alternative equivalent 
technology are set out in Sec.  195.420(e), there could be some 
confusion as to what the reference to ``drill'' means in the context of 
paragraph (b). Therefore, in this document, PHMSA is replacing the term 
``drill'' used in paragraph (b) with ``inspection'' to more closely 
align with the language used earlier within the same paragraph and 
better distinguish between the ``inspections'' required under Sec.  
195.420(b) and the ``drills'' conducted pursuant to Sec.  195.420(e).

II. D.C. Circuit Review of the Final Rule

    On May 16, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) vacated the final rule as it applies to 
gas and hazardous liquid gathering pipelines.\4\ Therefore, in this 
document, PHMSA is removing gathering line-specific amendments 
introduced in the final rule and revising the regulatory text 
throughout parts 192 and 195 to clarify that the final rule amendments 
do not apply to gas or hazardous liquid gathering lines. These 
corrections include revisions to Sec. Sec.  192.3, 192.9(b), (c), and 
(e)(1)(iv), 195.2, 195.11(b)(2), 195.258, 195.260, 195.402, 195.417, 
195.418, 195.419, 195.420, and 195.452. Specific amendments are 
discussed below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ GPA Midstream Ass'n v. U.S. Dep't of Transp., 67 F.4th 1188 
(D.C. Cir. 2023). The D.C. Circuit's vacatur remedy is self-
executing: PHMSA's memorialization in this notice of the court's 
vacatur as to gas and hazardous liquid gathering lines is not 
legally required but is intended to assist affected pipeline 
operators and other stakeholders in understanding precisely what 
requirements remain effective following the D.C. Circuit's decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Sections 192.3 and 195.2 are being revised to exempt 
gathering lines from the new definitions introduced in the final rule 
(``entirely replaced onshore transmission segments,'' ``entirely 
replaced onshore hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide segments,'' 
``notification of potential rupture,'' and ``rupture-mitigation 
valve''). While some of those definitions may not have been used within 
provisions applicable to gas or hazardous liquid gathering lines, the 
term ``notification of potential rupture'' was used in sections of 
parts 192 and 195 that had been applicable to gathering lines. 
Nevertheless, to minimize confusion for operators, PHMSA is now 
revising all of the final rule's new definitions to incorporate 
explicit exceptions for gathering lines so as to ensure that operators 
are not subject to those terms.
     Section 192.9 is being revised to ensure that this section 
accurately lists the provisions of part 192 applicable to part 192-
regulated gas gathering lines by: (1) excluding Sec. Sec.  192.615 (to 
the extent modified by the final rule \5\), 192.617(b) through (d), and 
192.635 from applying to offshore gas gathering lines; (2) excluding 
Sec. Sec.  192.179(e) through (g), 192.610, 192.615 (to the extent 
modified by the final rule), 192.617(b) through (d), 192.634, 192.635, 
192.636, and 192.745(c) through (f) from applying to Type A regulated 
onshore gas gathering lines; and (3) excluding Sec.  192.615 (to the 
extent modified by the final rule) from applying to Type C regulated 
onshore gas gathering lines. While the language of Sec.  192.617(a) 
(formerly Sec.  192.617) was modified slightly in the final rule, the 
preamble of the final rule explains that these non-substantive changes 
simply provided ``additional specificity to the existing regulation at 
Sec.  192.617,'' and that ``the underlying requirement remained 
unchanged,'' \6\ and therefore PHMSA is not exempting gas gathering 
lines from Sec.  192.617(a) in this document. No revisions were 
required to exempt Types B and C gas gathering lines from Sec.  
192.610, Sec.  192.617(b) through (d), Sec.  192.634, Sec.  192.635, 
Sec.  192.636, or Sec.  192.745(c) through (f), nor to exempt Type B 
gas gathering lines from the revised requirements of Sec.  192.615, 
because those sections are already non-applicable to those types of 
pipelines pursuant to Sec.  192.9(d) and (e). Similarly, no revisions 
were required to exempt offshore gas gathering lines from Sec. Sec.  
192.179(e) through (g), 192.610, 192.634, 192.636, and 192.745(c) 
through (f), since those sections are limited to onshore gas pipelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ PHMSA notes that, where the regulatory text of a provision 
requires compliance with the language in effect on October 4, 2022 
(immediately before the October 5, 2022 effective date of the final 
rule), that historical regulatory text can be found by using the 
``view historical versions'' link on the National Archives' web page 
for the current version of parts 192 and 195 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations. See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49.
    \6\ 87 FR 20969.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Finally, PHMSA is revising Sec. Sec.  195.258, 195.260, 
195.402, 195.417, 195.418, 195.419, 195.420, and 195.452 to expressly 
exempt hazardous liquid gathering lines from the requirements in those 
sections that were introduced in the final rule. For clarity, PHMSA is 
also revising Sec.  195.11(b)(2) to remove cross-references to any of 
those requirements.
    PHMSA revised Sec.  195.11(b)(2) in the final rule to establish the 
regulated rural gathering lines on which operators are required to 
install RMVs (at Sec.  195.11(b)(2)(ii)). While the RMV installation 
requirement at Sec.  195.11(b)(2)(ii) has been vacated by the D.C. 
Circuit and is therefore being removed in this document, PHMSA is also 
correcting a typographical error introduced in Sec.  195.11(b)(2) when 
the word ``constructed'' was mistakenly written as ``contracted'' 
during transcription of the original paragraph in the final rule.

III. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Statutory/Legal Authority

    Statutory authority for this document's corrections to the final 
rule, as with the final rule itself, whose discussion of statutory 
authority at section VI.A., 87 FR 20978, is incorporated herein by 
reference, is provided by the Federal Pipeline Safety Act (49 U.S.C. 
60101 et seq.). The Secretary delegated his authority under the Federal 
Pipeline Safety Act to the

[[Page 50059]]

PHMSA Administrator under 49 CFR 1.97.
    PHMSA finds it has good cause to make these corrections without 
notice and comment pursuant to section 553(b) of the Administrative 
Procedure Act (APA, 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.). Section 553(b)(B) of the APA 
provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and 
public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the 
public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice 
and an opportunity for public comment. As explained above, the textual 
alterations herein consist of editorial and technical corrections, 
including revisions to or codification of regulatory language (1) 
inadvertently deleted or omitted by the final rule, consistent with 
statements in the administrative record (including the preamble and 
amendatory text to the final rule and that make no substantive changes 
to the final rule but merely facilitate its implementation by aligning 
the regulatory text with the explanatory material in the final rule's 
preamble, amendatory text, and administrative record; or (2) consistent 
with judicial review of the final rule.\7\ Because the final rule is 
the product of an extensive administrative record with numerous 
opportunities for public comment, including through written comments 
and the Pipeline Advisory Committees, and because any requirements of 
the final rule vacated by the D.C. Circuit must be removed and 
``commentators could not have said anything during a notice and comment 
period that would have changed that fact,'' \8\ PHMSA finds that 
additional comment on the corrections herein is unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ GPA Midstream Ass'n v. U.S. Dep't of Transp., 67 F.4th at 
1201-1202. The D.C. Circuit has held that use of the APA's good 
cause exception is appropriate ``when rulemaking without notice and 
comment is `a reasonable and perhaps inevitable response to' a 
`court order.''' EME Homer City Generation, LP v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118, 
134-35 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
    \8\ EME Homer City Generation, LP v. EPA, 795 F.3d at 134.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The immediate effective date of the corrections contained in this 
document is authorized under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the APA. Section 
553(d)(3) provides that a rule should take effect ``not less than 30 
days'' after publication in the Federal Register, except for when good 
cause is found by the agency and published within the rule, thus 
allowing for earlier effectiveness. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). ``[T]he purpose 
of the thirty-day waiting period is to give affected parties a 
reasonable time to adjust their behavior before the final rule takes 
effect.'' Omnipoint Corp. v. F.C.C., 78 F.3d 620, 630 (D.C. Cir. 1996). 
PHMSA finds that good cause under section 553(d)(3) of the APA supports 
making the revisions effective upon publication in the Federal Register 
because the editorial and technical corrections at Sec. Sec.  
192.179(e) and (f), 192.610(b), 192.634, 192.636, 195.11(b)(2), 
195.258(e), 195.402(c)(5)(ii), 195.417(a) introductory text and (a)(3), 
195.418(b)(3), and 195.420(b) provide regulatory clarity for gas and 
hazardous liquid pipeline operators, and the correction to Sec.  
195.420 returning the word ``mainline'' to the regulations is 
consistent with the preamble of the final rule and the LPAC discussions 
on the subject.

B. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This document has been evaluated in accordance with existing 
policies and procedures, and is considered not significant under 
Executive Order 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review''),\9\ as 
amended by Executive Order 14094 (``Modernizing Regulatory 
Review''),\10\ and DOT Order 2100.6A (``Rulemaking and Guidance 
Procedures''); therefore, this document has not been reviewed by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). PHMSA finds that the editorial 
and technical corrections herein, in all respects consistent with the 
final rule (as modified by judicial review), impose no incremental 
compliance costs nor adversely affect safety, as they either (1) merely 
correct non-substantive typographical errors made during the drafting 
of the final rule and restore the intent of the final rule as discussed 
in its preamble and supporting documentation, or (2) codify the results 
of judicial review limiting the scope of application of the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
    \10\ 88 FR 21879 (Apr. 11, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Flexibility Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), 
generally requires Federal regulatory agencies to prepare a Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) for a final rule subject to 
notice-and-comment rulemaking under the APA. 5 U.S.C. 604(a).\11\ The 
Small Business Administration's implementing guidance explains that 
``[i]f an NPRM is not required, the RFA does not apply.'' \12\ Because 
PHMSA has ``good cause'' under the APA to forego comment on the 
corrections herein, no FRFA is required. Moreover, PHMSA prepared a 
FRFA for the final rule, which is available in the docket for this 
rulemaking; \13\ because the corrections herein will impose no new 
incremental compliance costs, the analysis in that FRFA remains 
unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ This requirement is subject to exceptions--which are not in 
any event applicable here because PHMSA has good cause to forego 
comment in adopting the corrections herein.
    \12\ Small Business Administration, ``A Guide for Government 
Agencies: How to Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act'' 55 
(2017).
    \13\ Doc. No. PHMSA-2013-0255-0046.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The corrections in this document impose no new or revised 
information collection requirements beyond those discussed in the final 
rule. As explained above, the changes being made in this document are 
non-substantive, and they will require no change to the current 
incident and annual reporting forms and their respective instructions.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    PHMSA analyzed the corrections in this document under the factors 
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et 
seq.) and determined that the corrections to the final rule herein do 
not impose enforceable duties of $100 million or more, adjusted for 
inflation, in any one year, on state, local, or tribal governments, or 
on the private sector. PHMSA prepared an analysis of the UMRA 
considerations in the Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for the final 
rule, which is available in the docket for the rulemaking. Because the 
corrections herein will impose no new incremental compliance costs, the 
analysis in that UMRA discussion for the final rule need not be 
changed.

F. National Environmental Policy Act

    The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 
et seq.) requires Federal agencies to prepare a detailed statement on 
major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment. PHMSA analyzed the final rule in accordance with NEPA, 
implementing Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR parts 
1500 through 1508) and DOT implementing policies (DOT Order 5610.1C, 
``Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts''), and determined 
the final rule would not significantly affect the quality of the human 
environment.\14\ The corrections to the final rule in this document 
either (1) have no effect on PHMSA's earlier

[[Page 50060]]

NEPA analysis, as they are consistent with, and facilitate compliance 
with, the final rule, or (2) merely codify the results of judicial 
review of the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Final Environmental Assessment, Doc. No. PHMSA-2013-0255-
0045.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Privacy Act Statement

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), the DOT solicits comments from 
the public to inform its rulemaking process. The DOT posts these 
comments, without edit, including any personal information the 
commenter provided, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system 
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 
www.dot.gov/privacy.

H. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    PHMSA has analyzed this document in accordance with the principles 
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism'').\15\ 
The corrections herein are consistent with, and facilitate compliance 
with, the final rule, and they do not have any substantial direct 
effect on the states, the relationship between the Federal Government 
and the states, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among 
the various levels of government beyond what was accounted for in the 
final rule. This document does not contain any provision that imposes 
any substantial direct compliance costs on state or local governments, 
nor any new provision that preempts state law. Therefore, the 
consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not 
apply.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999).
    \16\ Moreover, PHMSA determined that the final rule did not 
impose substantial direct compliance costs on state and local 
governments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Executive Order 13211

    PHMSA analyzed the final rule and determined that the requirements 
of Executive Order 13211 (``Actions Concerning Regulations that 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'') \17\ did 
not apply. The corrections to the final rule herein are not a 
``significant energy action'' under Executive Order 13211 either, as 
they are not likely to have a significant adverse effect on supply, 
distribution, or energy use. Further, OMB has not designated the 
corrections herein as a significant energy action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Executive Order 13175

    This document was analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (``Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'') \18\ and DOT Order 
5301.1 (``Department of Transportation Policies, Programs, and 
Procedures Affecting American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Tribes''). 
Because none of the corrections herein have tribal implications or 
impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal 
governments, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive 
Order 13175 do not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

K. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis

    Under Executive Order 13609 (``Promoting International Regulatory 
Cooperation''),\19\ agencies must consider whether the impacts 
associated with significant variations between domestic and 
international regulatory approaches are unnecessary or may impair the 
ability of American business to export and compete internationally. In 
meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, 
environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation 
can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that 
are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. 
International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or 
prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The 
corrections to the final rule in this document do not impact 
international trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 77 FR 26413 (May 4, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

L. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    A RIN is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified 
Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service 
Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. 
The RIN contained in the heading of this document can be used to cross-
reference this action with the Unified Agenda.

M. Severability

    The purpose of these editorial and technical corrections is to 
facilitate operator compliance with, and codify the results of judicial 
review of, the final rule. However, PHMSA recognizes that certain 
provisions focus on unique topics. Therefore, PHMSA finds that each of 
the editorial and technical corrections in this rule are severable and 
able to function independently if severed from each other. In the event 
a court were to invalidate one or more of the unique provisions of this 
rule, the remaining provisions should stand, thus allowing their 
continued effect.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 192

    Gas, Natural gas, Pipeline safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

49 CFR Part 195

    Anhydrous ammonia, Carbon dioxide, Petroleum, Pipeline safety, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    In consideration of the foregoing, PHMSA makes the following 
correcting amendments to 49 CFR parts 192 and 195:

PART 192--TRANSPORTATION OF NATURAL GAS AND OTHER GAS BY PIPELINE: 
MINIMUM FEDERAL SAFETY STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 192 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 30 U.S.C. 185(w)(3), 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60101 et. seq., 
and 49 CFR 1.97.

0
2. Amend Sec.  192.3 by revising the definitions for ``Entirely 
replaced onshore transmission pipeline segments,'' ``Notification of 
potential rupture,'' and ``Rupture-mitigation valve'' to read as 
follows:

Sec.  192.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Entirely replaced onshore transmission pipeline segments means, for 
the purposes of Sec. Sec.  192.179 and 192.634, where 2 or more miles, 
in the aggregate, of onshore transmission pipeline have been replaced 
within any 5 contiguous miles of pipeline within any 24-month period. 
This definition does not apply to any gathering line.
* * * * *
    Notification of potential rupture means the notification to, or 
observation by, an operator of indicia identified in Sec.  192.635 of a 
potential unintentional or uncontrolled release of a large volume of 
gas from a pipeline. This definition does not apply to any gathering 
line.
* * * * *
    Rupture-mitigation valve (RMV) means an automatic shut-off valve 
(ASV) or a remote-control valve (RCV) that a pipeline operator uses to 
minimize the volume of gas released from the pipeline and to mitigate 
the consequences of a rupture. This definition does not apply to any 
gathering line.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  192.9 by revising paragraphs (b), (c), and (e)(1)(iv) to 
read as follows:

Sec.  192.9  What requirements apply to gathering lines?

* * * * *

[[Page 50061]]

    (b) Offshore lines. An operator of an offshore gathering line must 
comply with requirements of this part applicable to transmission lines, 
except the requirements in Sec. Sec.  192.13(d), 192.150, 192.285(e), 
192.319(d) through (g), 192.461(f) through (i), 192.465(d) and (f), 
192.473(c), 192.478, 192.485(c), 192.493, 192.506, 192.607, 192.613(c), 
192.619(e), 192.624, 192.710, 192.712, and 192.714, and in subpart O of 
this part. Further, operators of offshore gathering lines are exempt 
from the requirements of Sec. Sec.  192.617(b) through (d) and 192.635. 
Lastly, operators of offshore gathering lines are exempt from the 
requirements of Sec.  192.615 (but an operator of an offshore gathering 
line must comply with the requirements of 49 CFR 192.615, effective as 
of October 4, 2022).
    (c) Type A lines. An operator of a Type A regulated onshore 
gathering line must comply with the requirements of this part 
applicable to transmission lines, except the requirements in Sec. Sec.  
192.13(d), 192.150, 192.285(e), 192.319(d) through (g), 192.461(f) 
through (i), 192.465(d) and (f), 192.473(c), 192.478, 192.485(c) 
192.493, 192.506, 192.607, 192.613(c), 192.619(e), 192.624, 192.710, 
192.712, and 192.714, and in subpart O of this part. However, an 
operator of a Type A regulated onshore gathering line in a Class 2 
location may demonstrate compliance with subpart N of this part by 
describing the processes it uses to determine the qualification of 
persons performing operations and maintenance tasks. Further, operators 
of Type A regulated onshore gathering lines are exempt from the 
requirements of Sec. Sec.  192.179(e) through (g), 192.610, 192.617(b) 
through (d), 192.634, 192.635, 192.636, and 192.745(c) through (f). 
Lastly, operators of Type A regulated onshore gathering lines are 
exempt from the requirements of Sec.  192.615 (but an operator of a 
Type A regulated onshore gathering line must comply with the 
requirements of 49 CFR 192.615, effective as of October 4, 2022).
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iv) Develop and implement procedures for emergency plans in 
accordance with the requirements of 49 CFR 192.615, effective as of 
October 4, 2022;
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  192.179 by revising paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  192.179  Transmission line valves.

* * * * *
    (e) For onshore transmission pipeline segments with diameters 
greater than or equal to 6 inches that are constructed after April 10, 
2023, the operator must install rupture-mitigation valves (RMV) or an 
alternative equivalent technology whenever a valve must be installed to 
meet the appropriate valve spacing requirements of this section. An 
operator seeking to use alternative equivalent technology must notify 
PHMSA in accordance with the procedures set forth in paragraph (g) of 
this section. All RMVs and alternative equivalent technologies 
installed pursuant to this paragraph (e) must meet the requirements of 
Sec.  192.636. The installation requirements in this paragraph (e) do 
not apply to pipe segments with a potential impact radius (PIR), as 
defined in Sec.  192.903, that is less than or equal to 150 feet in 
either Class 1 or Class 2 locations. An operator may request an 
extension of the installation compliance deadline requirements of this 
paragraph (e) if it can demonstrate to PHMSA, in accordance with the 
notification procedures in Sec.  192.18, that those installation 
compliance deadlines would be economically, technically, or 
operationally infeasible for a particular new pipeline.
    (f) For entirely replaced onshore transmission pipeline segments, 
as defined in Sec.  192.3, with diameters greater than or equal to 6 
inches and that are installed after April 10, 2023, the operator must 
install RMVs or an alternative equivalent technology whenever a valve 
must be installed to meet the appropriate valve spacing requirements of 
this section. An operator seeking to use alternative equivalent 
technology must notify PHMSA in accordance with the procedures set 
forth in paragraph (g) of this section. All RMVs and alternative 
equivalent technologies installed pursuant to this paragraph (f) must 
meet the requirements of Sec.  192.636. The requirements of this 
paragraph (f) apply when the applicable pipeline replacement project 
involves a valve, either through addition, replacement, or removal. The 
installation requirements in this paragraph (f) do not apply to pipe 
segments with a PIR, as defined in Sec.  192.903, that is less than or 
equal to 150 feet in either Class 1 or Class 2 locations. An operator 
may request an extension of the installation compliance deadline 
requirements of this paragraph (f) if it can demonstrate to PHMSA, in 
accordance with the notification procedures in Sec.  192.18, that those 
installation compliance deadlines would be economically, technically, 
or operationally infeasible for a particular pipeline replacement 
project.
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec.  192.610 by revising paragraph (b) introductory text to 
read as follows:

Sec.  192.610  Change in class location: Change in valve spacing.

* * * * *
    (b) If a class location change on a gas transmission pipeline 
occurs after October 5, 2022, and results in pipe replacement of less 
than 2 miles within 5 contiguous miles during a 24-month period, to 
meet the MAOP requirements in Sec.  192.611, Sec.  192.619, or Sec.  
192.620, then within 24 months of the class location change, in 
accordance with Sec.  192.611(d), the operator must either:
* * * * *

0
6. Amend Sec.  192.634 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(3); and
0
b. Removing paragraph (c).
    The revision reads as follows:

Sec.  192.634  Transmission lines: Onshore valve shut-off for rupture 
mitigation.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Laterals. Laterals extending from shut-off segments that 
contribute less than 5 percent of the total shut-off segment volume may 
have RMVs or alternative equivalent technologies that meet the 
actuation requirements of this section at locations other than mainline 
receipt/delivery points, as long as all of the laterals contributing 
gas volumes to the shut-off segment do not contribute more than 5 
percent of the total shut-off segment gas volume based upon maximum 
flow volume at the operating pressure. For laterals that are 12 inches 
in diameter or less, a check valve that allows gas to flow freely in 
one direction and contains a mechanism to automatically prevent flow in 
the other direction may be used as an alternative equivalent technology 
where it is positioned to stop flow into the shut-off segment. Such 
check valves that are used as an alternative equivalent technology in 
accordance with this paragraph (b)(3) are not subject to Sec.  192.636, 
but they must be inspected, operated, and remediated in accordance with 
Sec.  192.745, including for closure and leakage to ensure operational 
reliability. An operator using such a check valve as an alternative 
equivalent technology must notify PHMSA in accordance with Sec. Sec.  
192.18 and 192.179 and develop and implement maintenance procedures for 
such equipment that meet Sec.  192.745.
* * * * *

[[Page 50062]]

0
7. Amend Sec.  192.636 by adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:

Sec.  192.636  Transmission lines: Response to a rupture; capabilities 
of rupture-mitigation valves (RMVs) or alternative equivalent 
technologies.

* * * * *
    (h) Manual operation upon identification of a rupture. Operators 
using a manual valve as an alternative equivalent technology as 
authorized pursuant to Sec. Sec.  192.18, 192.179, and 192.634 and this 
section must develop and implement operating procedures that 
appropriately designate and locate nearby personnel to ensure valve 
shutoff in accordance with this section and Sec.  192.634. Manual 
operation of valves must include time for the assembly of necessary 
operating personnel, the acquisition of necessary tools and equipment, 
driving time under heavy traffic conditions and at the posted speed 
limit, walking time to access the valve, and time to shut off all 
valves manually, not to exceed the maximum response time allowed under 
paragraph (b) or (c) of this section.

PART 195--TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS LIQUIDS BY PIPELINE

0
8. The authority citation for part 195 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  30 U.S.C. 185(w)(3), 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60101 et seq., 
and 49 CFR 1.97.

0
9. Amend Sec.  195.2 by:
0
a. Revising the definition for ``Entirely replaced onshore hazardous 
liquid or carbon dioxide pipeline segments'';
0
b. Removing the definition ``Notification of Potential Rupture'' and 
adding the definition ``Notification of potential rupture'' in its 
place; and
0
c. Revising the definition for ``Rupture-mitigation valve''.
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  195.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Entirely replaced onshore hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide 
pipeline segments, for the purposes of Sec. Sec.  195.258, 195.260, and 
195.418, means where 2 or more miles of pipe, in the aggregate, have 
been replaced within any 5 contiguous miles within any 24-month period. 
This definition does not apply to any gathering line.
* * * * *
    Notification of potential rupture means the notification to, or 
observation by, an operator of indicia identified in Sec.  195.417 of a 
potential unintentional or uncontrolled release of a large volume of 
commodity from a pipeline. This definition does not apply to any 
gathering line.
* * * * *
    Rupture-mitigation valve (RMV) means an automatic shut-off valve 
(ASV) or a remote-control valve (RCV) that a pipeline operator uses to 
minimize the volume of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide released from 
the pipeline and to mitigate the consequences of a rupture. This 
definition does not apply to any gathering line.
* * * * *

0
10. Amend Sec.  195.11 by revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.11  What is a regulated rural gathering line and what 
requirements apply?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) For steel pipelines constructed, replaced, relocated, or 
otherwise changed after July 3, 2009:
    (i) Design, install, construct, initially inspect, and initially 
test the pipeline in compliance with this part, unless the pipeline is 
converted under Sec.  195.5.
    (ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *

0
11. Amend Sec.  195.258 by revising paragraph (e) and adding paragraph 
(f) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.258  Valves: General.

* * * * *
    (e) If an operator elects to use alternative equivalent technology 
in accordance with paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, the operator 
must notify PHMSA in accordance with Sec.  195.18. The operator must 
include a technical and safety evaluation in its notice to PHMSA. 
Valves that are installed as alternative equivalent technology must 
comply with Sec. Sec.  195.418, 195.419, and 195.420. An operator 
requesting use of manual valves as an alternative equivalent technology 
must also include within the notification submitted to PHMSA a 
demonstration that installation of an RMV as otherwise required would 
be economically, technically, or operationally infeasible. An operator 
may use a manual pump station valve at a continuously manned station as 
an alternative equivalent technology. Such a valve used as an 
alternative equivalent technology would not require a notification to 
PHMSA in accordance with Sec.  195.18, but it must comply with 
Sec. Sec.  195.419 and 195.420.
    (f) The requirements of paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section 
do not apply to gathering lines.

0
12. Amend Sec.  195.260 by adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.260  Valves: Location.

* * * * *
    (i) An operator of a gathering line must only comply with the 
requirements of 49 CFR 195.260 effective as of October 4, 2022, and 
need not comply with the other requirements of this section.

0
13. Amend Sec.  195.402 by revising paragraph (c)(5)(ii) introductory 
text and adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.402  Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and 
emergencies.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) Analysis of rupture and valve shut-offs; preventive and 
mitigative measures. If a failure or accident on an onshore hazardous 
liquid or carbon dioxide pipeline involves the closure of a rupture-
mitigation valve (RMV), as defined in Sec.  195.2, or the closure of an 
alternative equivalent technology, the operator of the pipeline must 
also conduct a post-failure or post-accident analysis of all the 
factors that may have impacted the release volume and the consequences 
of the release, and identify and implement operations and maintenance 
measures to minimize the consequences of a future failure or accident. 
The analysis must include all relevant factors impacting the release 
volume and the consequences, including, but not limited to, the 
following:
* * * * *
    (g) Exception. An operator of a gathering line must only comply 
with the requirements of 49 CFR 195.402 effective as of October 4, 
2022, and need not comply with the other requirements of this section.

0
14. Amend Sec.  195.417 by revising paragraphs (a) introductory text 
and (a)(3) and adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.417  Notification of potential rupture.

    (a) As used in this part, a notification of potential rupture means 
the notification to, or observation by, an operator (e.g., by or to its 
controller(s) in a control room, field personnel, nearby pipeline or 
utility personnel, the public, local responders, or public authorities) 
of one or more of the below indicia of a potential unintentional or 
uncontrolled release of a large volume of hazardous liquids or carbon 
dioxide from a pipeline:
* * * * *
    (3) Any unanticipated or unexplained rapid release of a large 
volume of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide, a

[[Page 50063]]

fire, or an explosion, in the immediate vicinity of the pipeline.
* * * * *
    (c) The requirements of this section do not apply to gathering 
lines.

0
15. Amend Sec.  195.418 by revising paragraph (b)(3) and adding 
paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.418  Valves: Onshore valve shut-off for rupture mitigation.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Laterals. Laterals extending from shut-off segments that 
contribute less than 5 percent of the total shut-off segment volume may 
have RMVs or alternative equivalent technologies that meet the 
actuation requirements of this section at locations other than mainline 
receipt/delivery points, as long as all of these laterals contributing 
hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide volumes to the shut-off segment do 
not contribute more than 5 percent of the total shut-off segment 
volume, based upon maximum flow volume at the operating pressure. A 
check valve may be used as an alternative equivalent technology where 
it is positioned to stop flow into the lateral. Check valves used as an 
alternative equivalent technology in accordance with this paragraph 
(b)(3) are not subject to Sec.  195.419 but must be inspected, 
operated, and remediated in accordance with Sec.  195.420, including 
for closure and leakage, to ensure operational reliability. An operator 
using such a valve as an alternative equivalent technology must submit 
a request to PHMSA in accordance with Sec.  195.18.
* * * * *
    (d) Exception. The requirements of this section do not apply to 
gathering lines.

0
16. Amend Sec.  195.419 by adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.419  Valve capabilities.

* * * * *
    (h) Exception. The requirements of this section do not apply to 
gathering lines.

0
17. Amend Sec.  195.420 by revising paragraph (b) and adding paragraph 
(h) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.420  Valve maintenance.

* * * * *
    (b) Each operator must, at least twice each calendar year, but at 
intervals not exceeding 7\1/2\ months, inspect each mainline valve to 
determine that it is functioning properly. Each rupture-mitigation 
valve (RMV), as defined in Sec.  195.2 and not contained in a gathering 
line, or alternative equivalent technology that is installed under 
Sec.  195.258(c) or Sec.  195.418, must also be partially operated. 
Operators are not required to close the valve fully during the 
inspection; a minimum 25 percent valve closure is sufficient to 
demonstrate compliance, unless the operator has operational information 
that requires an additional closure percentage for maintaining 
reliability.
* * * * *
    (h) The requirements of paragraphs (d) through (g) of this section 
do not apply to gathering lines.

0
18. Amend Sec.  195.452 by revising paragraph (i)(4) introductory text 
and adding paragraph (i)(4)(iv) to read as follows:

Sec.  195.452  Pipeline integrity management in high consequence areas.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (4) Emergency Flow Restricting Devices (EFRD). If an operator 
determines that an EFRD is needed on a pipeline segment that is located 
in, or which could affect, a high-consequence area (HCA) in the event 
of a hazardous liquid pipeline release, an operator must install the 
EFRD. In making this determination, an operator must, at least, 
evaluate the following factors--the swiftness of leak detection and 
pipeline shutdown capabilities, the type of commodity carried, the rate 
of potential leakage, the volume that can be released, topography or 
pipeline profile, the potential for ignition, proximity to power 
sources, location of nearest response personnel, specific terrain 
within the HCA or between the pipeline segment and the HCA it could 
affect, and benefits expected by reducing the spill size. An RMV 
installed under this paragraph (i)(4) must meet all of the other 
applicable requirements in this part, provided that the requirement of 
this sentence does not apply to gathering lines.
* * * * *
    (iv) The requirements of paragraphs (i)(4)(i) through (iii) of this 
section do not apply to gathering lines.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 21, 2023, under authority 
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Tristan H. Brown,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2023-15904 Filed 7-31-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P