Perhaps in an effort to convince Congress to lay off, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) just issued an advisory bulletin to promote the implementation of pipeline safety management systems (PSMS) by regulated pipeline owners and operators.
During hearings in February in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee — aimed at developing the contents of a new pipeline safety bill — Bill Caram, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust, said widespread adoption of pipeline safety management systems still eludes the pipeline industry
“Congress could make a meaningful difference in pipeline safety, by directing PHMSA to take steps toward widespread industry adoption,” he added.
One month later, PHMSA published its advisory bulletin that said in part, “PHMSA encourages pipeline operators to develop and to implement PSMS programs using a framework, such as the one detailed in American Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended Practice (RP) 1173.”
In announcing the initiative, PHMSA Acting-Administrator Ben Kochman said, “Safety Management Systems bring about a much-needed evolution of internal pipeline safety management structures, policies and procedures that will ultimately lead us to achieve our goal of zero incidents. We encourage all regulated pipeline owners and operators to fully embrace the continuous improvement and enhanced safety benefits that come with implementing a pipeline SMS.”
The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA) welcomed the PHMSA advisory bulletin. Amy Andryszak, president & CEO of the INGAA, said since the publication of RP1173, INGAA and the INGAA Foundation have promoted the implementation of PSMS through annual workshops and the sharing of leading practices among members.
“Our members acknowledge that improving safety performance is both essential and an ongoing journey, and we appreciate the support of Secretary Duffy and Acting Administrator Kochman in advancing safety management systems,” she said.
Duffy is Sean Duffy, secretary of the Department of Transportation, the parent department for the PHMSA.
In July 2024, the Pipeline Safety Management Systems (Pipeline SMS) Industry Team published its latest annual report, for year 2023, which said for the third year in a row that nearly 85% of transmission and gathering mileage participated in voluntary pipeline SMS implementation. That team is made up of members of U.S. and Canadian oil and gas pipeline trade associations. That report did not report on the extent of the systems put in place, in terms of format and internal enforcement.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued an alert in July 2024 that said “[a]lthough PSMS have been adopted by operators, representing 85 percent of industry pipeline mileage, many operators, particularly smaller operators, have not yet adopted PSMS.”
More than one-half of the smallest category of operators reported that their PSMS efforts best fit the “stalled” characterization. The NTSB added that despite the 85% adoption number, the pipeline industry “continues to have accidents that could have been prevented or the consequences more effectively mitigated, had risks been more thoroughly identified and addressed.”
Safety management system adoption by pipelines picked up speed after tragic pipeline accidents more than 15 years ago. Those accidents led to the National Transportation Safety Board issuing a recommendation that pipelines adopt SMS, which led to the American Petroleum Institute issuing API RR 1173 in July 2015.
In January 2024, NTSB issued Safety Recommendation P-24-002 to PHMSA in response to a pipeline release that occurred on Oct. 1, 2021, in San Pedro Bay in California. In that safety recommendation, NTSB advised PHMSA to issue “an advisory bulletin to all Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration-regulated pipeline owners and operators promoting the benefits of pipeline safety management systems and asking them to develop and implement such a system based on American Petroleum Institute Recommended Practice 1173.”
The NTSB stated that “the implementation of a robust PSMS program would have helped [the operator of the ruptured pipeline] …comply with regulations, ensure employees were following company procedures and better prepare personnel to respond and react to the conditions found during this release.”
EPA Considers Changes to Pipeline Emission Regulations
Now that Congress has passed a resolution of disapproval, canceling the methane emissions tax on interstate gas pipelines, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has its sights set on two more pipeline regulations, which it wants to either modify or cancel on its own authority. These regulations are on greenhouse gas emission reporting and emission standards and compliance schedules for the control of methane and other emissions. The two regulations are, with regard to methane emissions, intertwined.
Elizabeth Malone, an attorney with Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP, said in a blog post about the two EPA pipeline deregulatory actions:
Many of the administration’s environmental orders and actions have been, or likely will be, challenged in court, and it is uncertain how the courts will view these efforts. The long-term effect of these orders and deregulatory actions, therefore, remains to be seen.
In announcing the deregulatory efforts, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said:
Oil and gas standards promulgated by EPA must be rooted in the rule of law, not be used as a weapon to shut down development and manufacturing in the United States. EPA is reconsidering these regulations to ensure they do not prevent America from unleashing energy dominance and continuing our trajectory as a leader in clean energy and emissions reductions.
The greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting regulation, (Subpart W, in the agency’s Clean Air lexicon), enacted in 2010, requires interstate gas pipelines to report GHG data and other relevant information to the EPA. Much of that data is also available to the public.
INGAA said changes to the GHG reporting rule proposed by the EPA in 2022 (reproposed in 2023 and then made final in May 2024) would have a “significant impact” on the industry. The agency recently extended the reporting deadline for reporting year 2024 from March 31, 2025, to May 30, 2025.
The other upcoming regulatory change is to the March 2024 final rule (hereafter referred to as 0000 b/c), aimed at reducing methane emissions at natural gas industry sites by imposing new controls on such things as storage vessels and pneumatic controllers, as well as requirements for zero emission controllers and dry seals for centrifugal and rod packing of reciprocating compressors.
The EPA issued a notice of “reconsideration” of 0000 b/c soon after President Trump took office. That was based on a petition for review submitted the American Petroleum Institute in April 2024. The API was contesting a very narrow slice of the final rule relating to vent gas net heating value (NHV) continuous monitoring requirements and alternative performance test (sampling demonstration) option for flares and enclosed combustion devices.
Then on Feb. 28, the API wrote to the EPA saying, “Upon review of the changes proposed in this action, we have found that EPA only partially addressed our concerns and should make additional changes to fully address these issues and ensure the final rule is technically feasible and implementable.”
The EPA’s upcoming changes to the methane emissions rule may in the end not be all that important. With regard to enforcement of control violations, the EPA says it is also reining in the Mitigating Climate Change enforcement program, which began under the Biden administration and included natural gas facility inspections as one of its three areas of emphasis.
In fiscal year 2024, the EPA concluded 19 oil and gas enforcement cases resulting in emissions reductions of over 829,000 mtpa of carbon dioxide equivalent methane and over 33,000 mtpa VOCs and imposed almost $72 million in civil penalties. Most of those appeared to be for violations of gas processing or production facilities. P&GJ