U.S. DOT/RSPA - Final Regulatory Evaluation and Regulatory Flexibility Certification, High Consequence Areas for Gas Transmission Pipelines

Page 1* U.S. Department of Transportation - -- -3 - -7 1 -1 3 A J Research and Special Programs Administration c 3 -4 L Final Regulatory Evaluation and Regulatory Flexibility Certification High Consequence Areas for Gas Transmission Pipelines a-1d 3 -#

Page 2Reeulatorv Evaluation DOT considers this action to be a non-significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 958 FR 57135;October 4, 1993). Therefore, the Office of Management and Budget ( O M ) has not reviewed this rulemaking document. This final rule is also not significant under DOT’S regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979). Several mmmenters to the proposed rule (67 FR 1108-11 15, January 9,2002) disagreed with RSPA’s contention that this rule would incur no costs because it was only a definition. Nisource Inc.’s submission to the public docket on the proposed HCA rule most closely describes RSPA’s position that the cost of this rule should be calculated with the implementation of the Pipeline Safety: Pipeline Integrity Management in High Consequence Areas (Gas Transmission Operators) Rule. “ While this proposed rule may have no immediate cost impact on the pipeline industq or the public, as ‘it is only a definition,’ there is no doubt that the rule’s definition of High Consequence Areas (HCAs) will drive future costs.” RSPA is in the final stages of developing and publishing its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Gas Integrity Management. In that proposal, RSPA has estimated the cost to gas pipeline operators to determine which part of its pipeline would fit the detinition for High Consequence Areas. Therefore, RSPA maintains its belief that this final rule has no cost impact on the pipeline industry or the public as it is only a definition. The HCA definition will be used in the forthcoming Pipeline Safety: Pipeline Integrity Management in High Consequence Areas ( G a s Transmission Operators) Rule. When we issue that proposed rule, we will then fblly evaluate all the associated costs and benefits. - - - - R e g u l a t o l y - F l e r i b ~ i ~ ~ € t ~ ~ ~____________ Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U. S.C. 60 1, et seq.) RSPA must consider whether a rulemaking would have a signrficant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final rulemaking will not impose additional requirements on pipeline operators, including small entities that operate regulated pipelines. As this action only involves a definition , there are no cost implications, and thus we determined it had no impact on small entities. Costs are likely to result once we issue requirements for actions that use this definition a later date. RSPA will soon propose integrity management requirements for gas transmission pipelines in high consequence areas; at that time we will examine the costs and benefits of that rulemaking. Based on this information demonstrating that this rulemaking will not have an economic impact, I certirjl that this proposed rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.#