Pipeline Safety: Breakout Tank Inspection Rule
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Pipeline Safety: Breakout Tank Inspection Rule
- Posted
- Jun 2, 2026
- Comment period
- Jun 2, 2026 – Aug 4, 2026
- FR Doc
- 2026-10969
- CFR
- 49 CFR Part 195
- Topics
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Stance breakdown
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
- 2 comments from the past week
2 comments match your current view and arrived in the last week. Read this week's comments with stance, commenter type, and AI summaries on the paid plan.
- Aug 2, 2026Tax ConcernSupportIndividualRead comment →
- Aug 1, 2026Jonathan PrimeroOpposeIndividual
Jonathan Primero opposes the Pipeline Safety: Breakout Tank Inspection Rule, arguing that extending inspection timelines increases the risk of undetected corrosion and environmental catastrophes. He contends that the potential long-term costs of environmental damage and structural failure outweigh the immediate economic savings from reduced maintenance.
Read comment → - Jun 3, 2026Daniel FleckOpposeIndividual
The commenter argues that the proposed 20-year initial and 25-year reinspection intervals for breakout tanks are too frequent for tanks equipped with release prevention barriers and leak detection. They suggest extending these intervals to 30 years to align with API 653 standards and to reflect the reduced environmental risk associated with such containment systems.
Read comment →