Rulemakingcurrent
09000064824a106a
RegulusPipeline researchRegulusPipeline research09000064824a106a
Page 1U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Docket No. PHMSA-2013-0163 December 22, 2016 Prepared for: Office of Pipeline Safety Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Prepared by: John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology#
Page 2Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................................. I LIST OF ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................... II 1.0 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ..................................................................................... 2 2.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 PURPOSE AND NEED .......................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................................... 3 3.1 OVERVIEW OF ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................................................... 3 3.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ................................................................................................................. 3 3.3 SELECTED ALTERNATIVE .................................................................................................................. 4 3.3.1 Accident and Incident Notification ......................................................................................... 4 3.3.2 Cost Recovery for Design Reviews ......................................................................................... 4 3.3.3 NTSB Recommendation on Control Room Center Staff .......................................................... 5 3.3.4 Special Permit Renewal .......................................................................................................... 5 3.3.5 Farm Taps .............................................................................................................................. 5 3.3.6 Reversal of Flow or Change in Product ................................................................................. 6 3.3.7 Editorial Amendments ............................................................................................................ 6 3.3.8 Pipeline Assessment Tools ...................................................................................................... 7 3.3.9 Electronic Reporting of Drug and Alcohol Testing Results .................................................... 7 3.3.10 Post-Accident Drug and Alcohol Testing ........................................................................... 8 4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ......................... 8 4.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................ 8 4.2 ENVIORNMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALTERNATIVES ............................................................... 8 4.2.1 Selected Alternative ................................................................................................................ 9 4.2.2 Summary of Environmental Consequences of the Selected Alternative .................................11 4.2.3 No Action Alternative ............................................................................................................12 5.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION ...............................................................................................................12 6.0 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ................................................................................12 7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND REVIEWERS ..................................................................................13 7.1 PREPARERS ......................................................................................................................................13 7.2 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................13 i#
Page 3Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes LIST OF ACRONYMS CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CFR Code of Federal Regulations DIMP Distribution Integrity Management Program DOT United States Department of Transportation EA Environmental Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact NACE National Association of Corrosion Engineers NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NRC National Response Center OQ Operator Qualification PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration The Act Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 The rule Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes ii#
Page 4Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes 1.0 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS This final Environmental Assessment (EA) analyzes the environmental consequences associated with adopting the Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA's), rule “Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Proposed Changes” (the rule) The rule changes the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations (49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 190, 191, 192, 195, and 199) to address Sections 9 and 13 of the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-90, hereafter referred to as “the Act”) to make changes to the operator qualification requirements and other changes. The changes include: adding a specific time frame for telephonic or electronic notifications of accidents and incidents adding provisions for cost recovery for design reviews of new projects that cost over $2,500,000,000 or new and novel technologies modifying operator qualification requirements to address NTSB recommendation on control rooms adding provisions for the renewal of expiring special permits excluding farm taps from the requirements of the Distribution Integrity Management Program (DIMP) requirements while proposing safety requirements for the farm taps requiring pipeline operators to report to PHMSA permanent reversal of flow that lasts more than 30 days or a change in product addressing NTSB recommendations for control room team training providing assessment tools by incorporating consensus standards by reference in Part 195 for stress corrosion cracking direct assessment requiring retention of samples and additional testing in Part 199 requiring electronic reporting of drug and alcohol testing results in Part 199 requiring operators to keep a record of the reason why post-accident drug and alcohol test was not conducted for at least three years, and adding a procedure for requests to keep submitted information confidential. 1#
Page 5Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes 2.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION 2.1 INTRODUCTION A draft EA was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)1, as amended, and the Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508). This statute and the implementing regulations require that PHMSA assess the environmental impacts of any Proposed Federal Action; identify adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided should the Proposed Action be implemented; and evaluate alternatives to the Proposed Action, including a No Action Alternative, and their environmental effects. This final EA describes the effects of the Selected and the No Action Alternatives on the physical, human, and natural environment. This final EA also describes the changes that will take place as a result of the rule and how those changes may impact the human environment. Based on the analysis presented in this final EA, PHMSA has determined that the rule will not result in significant environmental impacts. 2.2 BACKGROUND Under the Federal Pipeline Safety Laws, 49 U.S.C. 60101 et seq., the Secretary of Transportation must prescribe minimum safety standards for pipeline transportation and for pipeline facilities. The Secretary has delegated this authority to the PHMSA Administrator (49 CFR 1.97(a)) and the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations can be found at 49 CFR 190-199. On January 3, 2012, President Obama signed the Act into law. Several sections of the Act require PHMSA to meet certain safety requirements that could only be achieved by making changes to the current Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations. In addition, PHMSA is modifying the operator qualification requirements, including addressing NTSB recommendation for control room center staff, add provisions for the renewal of expiring special permits, and other standard maintenance changes described in Section 3.0. 2.3 PURPOSE AND NEED PHMSA’s mission is to protect people and the environment from the risks of hazardous materials transportation. The purpose of this rule is to enhance pipeline integrity and safety to lessen the frequency and consequences of pipeline incidents that cause environmental degradation, personal injury, and loss of life. 1 42 U.S.C 4321 et seq. 2#
Page 6Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes The need for this action stems from the statutory mandates in Sections 9 and 13 of the Act, NTSB recommendations, and the need for other changes in the regulations. Section 9 of the Act directs PHMSA to require a specific time limit for telephonic or electronic reporting of pipeline accidents and incidents, and Section 13 of the Act directs PHMSA to recover costs associated with pipeline design reviews. NTSB has made recommendations regarding the clarification of NTSB recommendation for control room center staff, and to eliminate operator discretion with regard to post-accident drug and alcohol testing of covered employees. In addition, PHMSA’s safety regulations require periodic updates and clarifications to enhance compliance and overall safety. 3.0 ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 3.1 OVERVIEW OF ALTERNATIVES PHMSA considered two alternatives to the rule: the No Action Alternative and the Selected Alternative, a set of revisions to the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations to incorporate amendments. PHMSA examined the environmental impacts of the two alternatives, the No Action Alternative and the Selected Alternative. These alternatives are summarized in section 3.2 and 3.3 of this document. The no action alternative was rejected because PHMSA believes this would not reduce pipeline failures that are addressed by the Selected Alternative. We believe that PHMSA must take action to decrease the risks to public safety and the environment caused by pipeline failure. PHMSA believes the Selected Alternative is appropriate because it is consistent with the Act and will reduce pipeline failure through implementation of the set of rule changes. PHMSA’s Action is a set of amendments and editorial changes to the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations (49 CFR 190-192, 195 and 199), which are summarized in the sections below. A more detailed description of these changes can be found in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM 2013). 3.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The CEQ (Council on Environmental Quality) regulations for implementing NEPA require the analysis of a No Action Alternative. The No Action Alternative defines 3#
Page 7Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes existing conditions of the natural and human-made environment and serves as a baseline when analyzing environmental impacts of the Action. Under this alternative, PHMSA would not amend, correct errors, or update the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations. Existing errors, inconsistencies and outdated references in the regulations would remain. Pipeline operators would continue to be governed by the requirement of the existing Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations but would not be subject to the new requirements of the Act. 3.3 SELECTED ALTERNATIVE 3.3.1 Accident and Incident Notification Section 9 of the Act requires PHMSA to establish a specific time limit for telephonic or electronic reporting of pipeline accidents and incidents to the National Response Center (NRC). Currently, PHMSA requires pipeline owners and operators to notify the NRC by telephone or electronically at the earliest practicable moment following discovery (49 CFR §§ 191.5 and 195.52).2 Section 9(b)(1) of the Act requires PHMSA to issue regulations requiring owners and operators to notify the NRC not later than one hour after confirmed discovery of a pipeline accident or incident. PHMSA will revise the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations to require notification at the earliest practicable moment following the confirmed discovery of an accident or incident, not later than 1 hour following the time of such confirmed discovery. Owners and operators will also be required to revise their initial telephonic or electronic notice to the Secretary and the NRC with an estimate of the amount of the product released, an estimate of the number of fatalities and injuries, if any, and any other information determined appropriate by the Secretary, within 48 hours of the accident or incident, to the extent practicable. 3.3.2 Cost Recovery for Design Reviews PHMSA conducts facility design safety reviews in connection with proposals to construct, expand, or operate gas or hazardous liquid pipelines or liquefied natural gas pipeline facilities. Reviews include design, construction, and operational inspections and 2 In an advisory notice (67 FR 57060) dated September 6, 2002, PHMSA advised owners and operators of gas and hazardous liquids pipeline systems and liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities that at the earliest practicable opportunity usually means 1 to 2 hours after discovery of the incident. 4#
Page 8Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes oversight. PHMSA currently has no method for recovering from the operator of a pipeline the design review costs incurred by the agency in conducting these reviews. Section 13 of the Act allows PHMSA to recover costs associated with design reviews. Section 13 also allows PHMSA to prescribe a fee structure and assessment methodology for recovering costs associated with design reviews of new gas and hazardous liquid pipelines with overall design and construction costs totaling at least $2,500,000,000 or that contain new and novel technologies. PHMSA is proposing to exercise the cost recovery authority described in Section 13(a) of the Act by prescribing a fee structure and assessment methodology that is based on the costs of providing these reviews. 3.3.3 NTSB Recommendation on Control Room Center Staff This rulemaking action will address the NTSB recommendation for control room center staff that will clarify OQ requirements to control rooms (Safety Recommendation P-12- 8). Add a new paragraph (b)(5) to §§ 192.631 and 195.446 to require each operator to define the roles and responsibilities and qualifications of others who have the authority to direct or supersede the specific technical actions of controllers. PHMSA believes this change will reinforce that operators need to declare the roles, responsibilities, and qualifications of all others who, at times, could intervene in control room operations. 3.3.4 Special Permit Renewal This rulemaking action will amend 49 CFR 190.341 of the Federal pipeline safety regulations to add procedures for renewing a special permit. PHMSA is proposing to add permit renewal procedures to the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations. 3.3.5 Farm Taps This rulemaking action will amend the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations in 49 CFR Part 192 to exclude farm taps from the pipeline Distribution Integrity Management Program (DIMP requirements). A “farm tap” is a pipeline that branches from a transmission, gathering, or production pipeline to deliver gas to a farmer or other landowner. PHMSA has recognized farm taps as distribution lines for many years and these lines were included within the scope of the DIMP final rule for gas distribution pipelines in 2009 (74 FR 63906). Because farm taps are mostly located in less-populated 5#
Page 9Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes areas, the risk to the public from farm taps is generally low, and most farm taps are already addressed within Part 192, PHMSA is proposing to amend Part 192 to exempt farm taps from the DIMP requirements. However, to better protect customers served by these lines, PHMSA will amend Part 192, Subpart M - Maintenance by adding a new section that prescribes inspection activities for pressure regulators and over- pressurization protection equipment on service lines that originate from transmission, gathering, or production pipelines. 3.3.6 Reversal of Flow or Change in Product §§191.22 and 195.64 of the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations require operators to notify PHMSA electronically of the occurrence of certain events no later than 60 days before the events occur. PHMSA will expand the scope of reportable events in §§191.22 and 195.64 to include the reversal of flow of product or change in product in a mainline pipeline. The rule will require operators to notify PHMSA electronically no later than 60 days before there is a reversal of the flow of product through a pipeline and also in the instance that there is a change in the product flowing through a pipeline. Examples include, but may not be limited to, changing a transported product from liquid to gas, from crude oil to highly volatile liquids, and vice versa. This notification is not required for pipeline systems already designed for bi-directional flow, or when the reversal is not expected to last for 30 days or less. 3.3.7 Editorial Amendments PHMSA will make the following editorial amendments to the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations: In § 192.175(b) replace the erroneous formula C=(DxPxF/48.33) (C=(3DxPxF/1,000)) with the correct formula C = (3D*P*F)/1000) (C = (3D*P*F*)/6,895), where, C = (3D*P*F)/1000) is in inches (English unit), and C = (3D*P*F*)/6,895) is in millimeters (metric conversion). Amend the language in § 195.64(a) and § 195.64(c)(1)(ii) to correct the term “hazardous liquid” to read “hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide.” In § 195.248, replace the erroneous “100 feet (30 millimeters)” with the correct conversion of English to metric units “100 feet (30.5 meters). ” In § 195.452, add a new paragraph (a)(4) to clarify the applicability of § 195.452 to low stress pipelines as described in § 195.12. 6#
Page 10Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes 3.3.8 Pipeline Assessment Tools Periodic assessment of hazardous liquids pipelines is required by § 195.452. PHMSA will incorporate by reference consensus standards for assessing the physical condition of in-service hazardous liquids pipelines using in-line inspection and stress corrosion cracking direct assessment. Incorporation of the consensus standards will ensure better tool selection and analysis and therefore improve consistency, accuracy and quality in pipeline assessments conducted using these techniques. PHMSA will incorporate by reference the following consensus standards into 49 CFR Part 195: American Petroleum Institute standard 1163, “In-Line Inspection Systems Qualification Standard” (August 2005); National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International Standard Practice SP0102-2010 “Inline Inspection of Pipelines;” NACE SP0204-2008 “Stress Corrosion Cracking Direct Assessment;” American National Standards Institute / American Society for Nondestructive Testing ILI-PQ-2005, “In-line Inspection Personnel Qualification and Certification” (2005). Also, PHMSA will allow pipeline operators to conduct assessments using tethered or remote control tools not explicitly discussed in NACE SP0102-2010, provided the operators comply with applicable sections of NACE SP0102-2010. Each of these organizations has signed agreements with PHMSA to make these standards available to the public, free of charge on an Internet Web site. 3.3.9 Electronic Reporting of Drug and Alcohol Testing Results PHMSA’s pipeline safety regulations at 49 CFR 191.7 and 49 CFR 195.58 requires electronic reporting of most pipeline safety reports through the PHMSA Portal. PHMSA will require electronic reporting through the Portal for drug testing results required under § 199.119 and alcohol testing results required under § 199.229. Pipeline operators with less than 50 covered employees are currently required to submit these reports only when PHMSA provides written notice. PHMSA will modify these regulations to specify that PHMSA will provide notice to operators in the PHMSA Portal. 7#
Page 11Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes 3.3.10 Post-Accident Drug and Alcohol Testing While PHMSA's regulations require documentation of decisions not to administer a post- accident alcohol test; the obligation to document a decision not to administer a post- accident drug test is implied but not explicitly required. PHMSA will explicitly require documentation of a decision not to administer a post-accident drug test. In response to a NTSB recommendation, PHMSA will eliminate operator discretion with regard to drug and alcohol testing after an accident of each employee whose performance either contributed to the accident or cannot be completely discounted as a contributing factor to the accident. PHMSA will modify 49 CFR 199.105 and 49 CFR 199.225 by restating and further defining the existing requirement to conduct post-accident drug and alcohol testing of all employees except those for whom sufficient information establishes that they had no role in the accident. 4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 4.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The gas pipeline infrastructure in the United States is a network of over 2.6 million miles of pipelines (http://opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov/pipelineforum/facts-and-stats/incidents-and- mileage-report/). These pipelines exist in a variety of diverse environments, including offshore locations, highly populated urban sites, and unpopulated rural areas. Therefore, the affected environment is the land area and waterways in the United States where pipelines are located. 4.2 ENVIORNMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALTERNATIVES This section identifies the environmental effects of each alternative. These effects include impacts to human health and the physical environment. The physical environment includes: Air quality and climate Soils, topography and geology Water Resources (including Wetlands, Water Bodies and Floodplains) Historical and Archeological Resources Wildlife Farmland 8#
Page 12Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes 4.2.1 Selected Alternative This section identifies the environmental effects of each component of the rulemaking, including potential impacts to human health and to the physical environment, as defined in Section 4.2. Many of the changes included in the rule reflect existing prudent pipeline practices and others propose entirely new practices. Either way, the rule will require these practices. Where the rule will enhance the accuracy and quality of pipeline inspections, it may better identify conditions in existing pipelines which require maintenance activities. In such cases, the rule could lead to more excavations. This excavation will result in ground disturbance that has the potential to cause sedimentation into adjacent wetlands and waterways, if any are present. This could reduce water quality and diminish aquatic habitat. In addition, disturbance to vegetation could cause disturbance or reduce available wildlife habitat for terrestrial species. However, impacts associated with these excavations are expected to be localized and temporary in nature. Excavation could also disturb historical and archaeological resources and farmland, if any of these resources are present. While the linear size of these excavations will vary, it is expected that they would be contained within the existing rights-of-way. While such excavations will individually have minor localized environmental impacts, they will also decrease the likelihood of pipeline failures that could result in catastrophic damage to human health and the environment. Therefore, it is expected that in such cases, the rule will have a negligible temporary adverse impact but, due to decreased risk of release, will result in net positive impacts to the human environment, including air quality and climate, soils, topography, geology, water resources (floodplains, wetlands and water bodies), historical and archeological resources, wildlife, and farmland. To the extent that the rule will affect pipelines that exist in areas where Environmental Justice concerns exist, the regulatory amendments will have the same effect regardless of the geographic location of the pipelines. Therefore, Environmental Justice populations are not expected to be affected by the rule any differently than the general population. Because PHMSA believes that these regulatory amendments will increase pipeline safety across systems, we believe any impact to areas where environmental justice concerns exist will be positive. Therefore, consistent with Executive Order 12898 and DOT Order 5610.2(a), PHMSA does not anticipate that the rule will result in disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations. 9#
Page 13Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes In this section, environmental consequences of the Selected Alternative are examined for each component of the rulemaking, which are described in section 3.3. This section describes the potential impacts of each component on public health. Accident and Incident Notification: This rulemaking action will revise the pipeline safety regulations to establish time limits for telephonic or electronic notification of an accident or incident to require such notification at the earliest practicable moment following the confirmed discovery of an accident or incident, not later than 1 hour following the time of such confirmed discovery. PHMSA does not expect this change to affect the likelihood of pipeline failure. However, PHMSA believes that faster reporting can prevent or mitigate environmental and human health consequences of an incident because response activities can begin and be overseen by proper officials. Cost Recovery for Design Reviews: This rulemaking action will provide a fee structure and assessment methodology for recovering costs associated with design review of new gas and hazardous liquid pipelines. PHMSA does not expect this change to affect the likelihood of pipeline failure and therefore, will not result in any environmental impacts. Operator Qualification for Pipeline Controllers and Supervisors: This change will enhance the program by clarifying existing requirements. Therefore, PHMSA expects that this component of the rule will decrease the risk of pipeline failure and have a positive impact to human health and the physical environment. Special Permit Renewal: This rulemaking action will ensure that special permits are not granted without an expiration date. This will ensure that a special permit will not continue to be used if it is no longer in the best interest of public safety. Therefore, PHMSA expects that this component of the rule will decrease the risk of pipeline failure and have a positive impact to human health and the physical environment. Farm Taps: This rulemaking action will exempt Farm Taps from DIMP regulations. Arguably, the lifting of these requirements from farm taps could increase the potential for pipeline failure. However, PHMSA believes that this is proposal is prudent because most farm taps are located in less-populated areas, and risks to farm taps are lesser than risks to more extensive distribution systems. PHMSA believes that the risks that farm taps present is typically dependent upon the service line in which the farm tap is employed, and the environment in which it operates. Therefore, to account for the exemption of DIMP requirements, in this rulemaking, PHMSA is proposing to prescribe inspection activities for pressure regulators and over-pressurization protection equipment on service lines that originate from transmission, gathering, or production pipelines. Therefore, 10#
Page 14Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes PHMSA expects that the net effect of this component of the rule will be a possible minimal increase or have no impact on the risk of pipeline failure and to human health and the physical environment. Reversal of Flow or Change in Product: This rulemaking action will expand the list of events in §§ 191.22 and 195.64 that require electronic 60-day notification to PHMSA to include the reversal of flow of product or change in product in a mainline pipeline. This provision simply allows for greater awareness and oversight of changes to pipeline systems, which PHMSA believes generally increases safety and could potentially decrease the likelihood of pipeline failure. Editorial Amendments: The editorial amendments in the rulemaking will provide clarification and consistency to existing regulations, but are not expected to change the likelihood of pipeline failure and therefore, will not result in any environmental impacts. Pipeline Assessment Tools: This rulemaking action will incorporate by reference consensus standards for assessing the physical condition of in-service hazardous liquids pipelines using in-line inspection (ILI) and stress corrosion cracking direct assessment (SCCDA). Incorporation of these consensus standards will assure better consistency, accuracy and quality in pipeline assessments conducted using these techniques. Therefore, PHMSA expects that this component of the rule will decrease the risk of pipeline failure and have a positive impact to human health and the physical environment. Electronic Reporting of Drug and Alcohol Testing Results: Requiring operators provide electronic reporting for anti-drug testing results will ensure a qualified workforce; it is not expected to change the likelihood of pipeline failure and therefore, will not result in any environmental impacts. Post-Accident Drug and Alcohol Testing: The editorial amendment will provide clarification regarding decisions not to administer a post-accident alcohol test. PHMSA does not expect this to result in a component of the rule to change the likelihood of pipeline failure except that it will increase accountability and therefore, will not result in any environmental impacts. 4.2.2 Summary of Environmental Consequences of the Selected Alternative The Selected Alternative is not expected to result in significant environmental impacts and many provisions are expected to result in beneficial impacts. As discussed above, some elements of the rulemaking, such as more rigorous requirements for assessing the 11#
Page 15Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes physical condition of in-service pipelines could identify more conditions in existing pipelines which leads to an increase in excavations. Such excavations would individually have minor localized environmental impacts and would also decrease the likelihood of pipeline failures that could result in catastrophic damage to human health and the environment, resulting in a net benefit. Other provisions increase oversight, which is intended to increase safety and minimize the likelihood of failures, which account for the biggest threat to the human environmental from gas and hazardous liquids pipeline systems and liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities. 4.2.3 No Action Alternative No environmental impacts to human health, the physical environment or environmental justice would result from the no action alternative because no regulatory changes would occur. However, if the no action alternative were selected, the changes aimed at reducing pipeline failures and would not be implemented or achieved. Therefore, the no action alternative would be an inferior choice for environmental and human safety protection. 5.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION PHMSA requested public comments on the draft Environmental Assessment and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in a public notice on July 10, 2015 (80 FR 39916). The NPRM invited comments to address the potential environmental impacts. A total of 39 comments were received from the public, private companies and various industry groups. However, PHMSA received no comments regarding environmental concerns or NEPA compliance for this rulemaking. 6.0 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS This rule will clarify existing regulations, incorporate new standards, and make other revisions to increase safety and minimize the likelihood of failures, which account for the biggest threat to the human environment from gas and hazardous liquids pipeline systems. This rulemaking exempts farm taps from DIMP under Part 192, but PHMSA is adding inspection activities for pressure regulators on those lines. Due to the remote location of these gas lines, minimal if any increase in risk will result. PHMSA anticipates that this rule will enhance pipeline integrity and safety and lessen the risk and consequences of pipeline incidents that harm the environment and threaten human safety. Therefore, PHMSA finds that the selected alternative will not have a 12#
Page 16Final EA: Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, Accident and Incident Notification, and Other Pipeline Safety Changes significant or negative impact on the environment and will likely result in a positive impact on the environment. 7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND REVIEWERS 7.1 PREPARERS This EA was prepared by the following DOT staff from PHMSA and Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (part of the Research and Innovative Technology Administration): Preparers Volpe Center Preparers: Marla Engel, MRP, AICP, Environmental Protection Specialist Travis Mast, Biologist Reviewer: Sean Peirce, M.Sc., Economist PHMSA Reviewers: Amelia Samaras, PHMSA Tewabe Asebe, PHMSA Cameron Satterthwaite, PHMSA 7.2 REFERENCES NPRM 2013. Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 49 CFR Parts 190, 191, 192, 195, and 195199. 2013. “Pipeline Safety: Operator Qualification, Cost Recovery, and Other Pipeline Safety Proposed Changes.” Docket No. PHMSA- 2013-0163 13#
This material provides agency context. It does not replace binding regulatory text, and its legal effect depends on the underlying authority and facts.