Environmentalists are hoping that the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Association (PHMSA) will soon issue a proposed rulemaking that will become the new regulation governing the rail transport of liquefied natural gas in the United States. Environmentalists are questioning the PHMSA’s pace on this regulation.
PHMSA’s Delays in Proposing New Rules
Advocates, including Sahana Rao from the Natural Resources Defense Council, have criticized PHMSA for repeatedly missing deadlines to release a new rule and suspend the Trump-era regulation that allows LNG transport by rail without a special permit. Although the rule is technically active, no LNG has been transported under it. Environmentalists are urging PHMSA to act quickly to ensure regulatory certainty and safety. Despite proposals to suspend the rule, ongoing deadline extensions have raised concerns about the agency’s reliability.
According to PHMSA, the agency has received over 10,000 comments on the proposed suspension, including opposition from 24 state attorneys general. Environmentalists are questioning the impact of the PHMSA’s decisions.
PHMSA has been lobbied by fourteen state attorneys general and the District of Columbia to suspend Trump’s rule. Environmentalists are questioning the PHMSA’s responsiveness to these lobbying efforts.
Environmentalists are increasingly questioning the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA) approach to regulating the transport of liquefied natural gas (LNG) by rail. Despite receiving numerous comments and researching international safety practices, PHMSA has faced criticism for its delay in revising regulations initially set during the Trump administration. Critics argue that suspending the outdated rules would offer clearer regulatory guidance and enhance safety for all stakeholders.
Sahana Rao of the Natural Resources Defense Council highlights concerns about the lack of progress and ongoing debates about New Fortress Energy’s permit renewal. Additionally, Wes Gillingham from Catskill Mountainkeeper underscores the environmental risks associated with LNG rail transport, including potential increases in drilling, methane leaks, and other environmental hazards. The delay in regulatory updates and the failure to address these safety concerns have fueled doubts about PHMSA’s commitment to protecting both the environment and public safety.
PHMSA’s Response to Safety Concerns
PHMSA’s missed March deadline comes as the agency has been busy investigating rail safety initiatives in the aftermath of a Norfolk Southern train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio on Feb. 3. The PHMSA’s actions during this time have led environmentalists to question the PHMSA’s ability to multitask effectively.
Environmentalists have grown increasingly critical of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) regarding its handling of liquefied natural gas (LNG) rail transport regulations, particularly following the East Palestine derailment. They highlight LNG’s extreme flammability and its propensity to burn hotter and faster than other fuels, raising concerns about the catastrophic potential of an accident involving LNG, which could be equivalent to 30,000 gallons of gasoline per train car.
The ongoing investigation by PHMSA into LNG transport safety, coupled with delays in implementing effective regulations, has led to doubts about the agency’s efficiency and preparedness. New Fortress Energy’s proposal to use cryogenic tank cars, not currently available in the U.S., and the limited use of UN portable tanks underscore existing regulatory gaps.
While federal regulations permit LNG transport using UN portable tanks, environmentalists are concerned about PHMSA’s capacity to enforce robust safety measures. The agency’s slow pace in updating regulations and the lack of concrete plans for new tank cars contribute to skepticism. PHMSA asserts that updating the rules is a priority and that safety rules are under continuous review, particularly in light of the East Palestine incident. However, environmentalists, including Sahana Rao, argue that the agency’s inaction and slow progress are inadequate for ensuring community safety.
