Pipeline Safety Shift: New Bill Allows Risk-Based Inspections for Storage Tanks, Replacing Standard Rules

This new legislation is short but has a big impact on how pipeline companies maintain their infrastructure. Specifically, it allows owners and operators of pipeline facilities to switch from using the current standard inspection rules for certain storage tanks—called “in-service breakout tanks”—to using risk-based inspections instead (SEC. 1).

These breakout tanks are critical because they temporarily hold crude oil or other hazardous liquids during transport along a pipeline route. Right now, these tanks are subject to specific, established inspection rules under federal law (Chapter 601 of title 49, U.S. Code, and 49 CFR 195.432). The bill mandates that the Secretary of Transportation, through the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), must update the regulations to officially permit this shift to risk-based models.

The Shift to 'Risk-Based': What It Means

For the pipeline industry, this change is huge. Standard inspections often mean a fixed schedule—inspect every five years, check these specific components, etc. It’s a one-size-fits-all approach. Risk-based inspection (RBI), however, lets a company tailor its inspection schedule and scope based on the assessed risk of failure for that specific tank. If a tank is new, located far from water, and stores a less corrosive product, the company might argue it needs fewer inspections than an old tank near a river, storing highly volatile material.

The upside for operators is efficiency and cost savings. They can focus resources on the tanks that pose the highest risk, potentially reducing downtime and regulatory burden. For a major pipeline company, this could save millions in inspection costs, which is why they tend to push for these types of regulatory modernizations.

The Catch: Who Defines 'Risk'?

Here’s where things get tricky, especially for the communities living near these facilities. The bill allows the shift but doesn't define what an acceptable “risk-based inspection” model looks like. That crucial detail is entirely delegated to PHMSA to figure out in future rulemaking (SEC. 1).

If PHMSA creates a rigorous, science-backed framework that genuinely identifies and mitigates hazards, the system could be safer and more efficient. But if the new rules are too vague, or if the risk models are designed primarily to minimize cost rather than maximize safety, there's a real chance that oversight could be weakened. Replacing established, mandatory inspection standards with a model that relies on an operator’s internal risk assessment could potentially lead to a reduction in the overall scrutiny these critical tanks receive.

For example, if you live downstream from one of these breakout tanks, your safety assurance currently rests on a fixed inspection schedule. Under RBI, your safety assurance will rest on the quality of a mathematical model that determines how often that tank should be inspected. If that model underestimates the risk of corrosion or structural failure, the potential for an environmental disaster or community evacuation increases. This is why the details PHMSA sets in the next few months will matter far more than the bill itself.