Hearings to examine pipeline safety reauthorization, focusing on ensuring the safe and efficient movement of American energy.

1[Senate Hearing 119-145]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                        S. Hrg. 119-14556                    PIPELINE SAFETY REAUTHORIZATION:7                ENSURING THE SAFE AND EFFICIENT MOVEMENT8                           OF AMERICAN ENERGY910=======================================================================1112                                HEARING1314                               before the1516                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION,17                     FREIGHT, PIPELINES, AND SAFETY1819                                 of the2021                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,22                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION23                          UNITED STATES SENATE2425                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2627                             FIRST SESSION2829                               __________3031                              MAY 15, 20253233                               __________3435    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and36                             Transportation3738                 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3940                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov4142                               ______4344                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE454661-428 PDF                WASHINGTON : 20254748       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION4950                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS5152                             FIRST SESSION5354                       TED CRUZ, Texas, Chairman5556JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,57ROGER WICKER, Mississippi                Ranking58DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota59JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii60DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts61MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee          GARY PETERS, Michigan62TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin63TED BUDD, North Carolina             TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois64ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               JACKY ROSEN, Nevada65JOHN CURTIS, Utah                    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico66BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado67TIM SHEEHY, Montana                  JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania68SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  ANDY KIM, New Jersey69CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming              LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware7071                 Brad Grantz, Republican Staff Director72           Nicole Christus, Republican Deputy Staff Director73                     Liam McKenna, General Counsel74                   Lila Harper Helms, Staff Director75                 Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director76                     Jonathan Hale, General Counsel7778                                 ------7980 SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION, FREIGHT, PIPELINES, AND SAFETY8182TODD YOUNG, Indiana, Chairman        GARY PETERS, Michigan, Ranking83JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota84ROGER WICKER, Mississippi            BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii85DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts86DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois87ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico88BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  ANDY KIM, New Jersey89SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia9091                            C O N T E N T S9293                              ----------94                                                                   Page95Hearing held on May 15, 2025.....................................     196Statement of Senator Young.......................................     197Statement of Senator Peters......................................     298Statement of Senator Cruz........................................    2999Statement of Senator Lujan.......................................    37100Statement of Senator Moreno......................................    40101Statement of Senator Markey......................................    42102Statement of Senator Fischer.....................................    44103Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................    45104105                               Witnesses106107Robin Rorick, Vice President of Midstream Policy, American108  Petroleum Institute............................................     4109    Prepared statement...........................................     6110Andrew J. Black, President and Chief Executive Officer, Liquid111  Energy Pipeline Association....................................     0112    Prepared statement...........................................    11113Richard Leger, Senior Vice President, Natural Gas Business,114  CenterPoint Energy, on behalf of the American Gas Association..    14115    Prepared statement...........................................    16116Bill Caram, Executive Director, Pipeline Safety Trust............    19117    Prepared statement...........................................    20118119                                Appendix120121Letter dated May 13, 2025 to Chairman Todd Young and Ranking122  Member Gary Peters from GPA Midstream Association..............    51123Letter dated May 19, 2025 to Chairman Todd Young and Ranking124  Member Gary Peters from Alex Etchen, Vice President, Government125  Relations, Associated General Contractors of America...........    52126Response to written questions submitted to Robin Rorick by:127    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    53128    Hon. Edward Markey...........................................    55129Response to written questions submitted to Andrew J. Black by:130    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    56131    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    57132    Hon. Edward Markey...........................................    57133Response to written questions submitted to Richard Leger by:134    Hon. Todd Young..............................................    58135    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    59136    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    61137    Hon. Edward Markey...........................................    62138Response to written questions submitted to Bill Caram by:139    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    63140141                    PIPELINE SAFETY REAUTHORIZATION:142                ENSURING THE SAFE AND EFFICIENT MOVEMENT143                           OF AMERICAN ENERGY144145                              ----------146147                         THURSDAY, MAY 15, 2025148149                               U.S. Senate,150  Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Freight,151                             Pipelines, and Safety,152        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,153                                                    Washington, DC.154    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m., in155room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Todd Young,156Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.157    Present: Senators Young [presiding], Cruz, Fischer, Moreno,158Peters, Cantwell, Markey, and Lujan.159160             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG,161                   U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA162163    Senator Young. Good morning, everyone. I want to welcome164everyone to today's pipeline safety hearing where we will be165examining ways to increase the safe and efficient movement of166American energy.167    This is our first subcommittee hearing and it is great to168be with my colleague Senator Peters. We have worked169constructively on so many projects and I think this is such an170important one.171    So I am especially appreciative of our witnesses today so172that you can help educate us on this important topic.173    Nearly 3.3 million miles of pipelines traverse our country,174bringing essential resources to communities to ensure Americans175receive basic needs, needs like heat and electricity, and to176drive economic activity and create the jobs we all care about.177    While this infrastructure is vital to the success of the178American people, our economy, and our national security, there179are some inherent risks tied to such a vast ecosystem of180pipeline networks.181    At the end of last year in Whiting, Indiana, a pipeline182leak within the BP tank field occurred, generating concerns183from many in the community. While the repercussions were184limited, largely, thanks to the quick work of emergency185responders and talented technicians, not every leak has186similarly fortunate outcomes.187    Pipelines are the safest and the most efficient way to188transport materials and the operators are, obviously,189incentivized to keep the resources within the pipes.190    That being said, these instances should serve as a stark191reminder that we must remain vigilant in our efforts to uphold192the highest level of safety standards for our Nation's pipeline193network and secure the American people's trust in the operation194of this critical infrastructure.195    Our subcommittee plays a vital role in this work, which is196why we are here today examining the need to secure the safety197and resiliency of our pipeline infrastructure.198    I am hopeful this hearing will shine a light on areas199Congress should focus on as we look to reauthorize and,200hopefully, improve upon existing pipeline safety laws, whether201that is an examination of outstanding rulemakings, prohibitive202processes and red tape for preventing advancements in industry,203or inefficient tools for law enforcement to hold malicious204actors accountable when they seek to harm our Nation.205    I am also hopeful that we can use this hearing to learn how206emerging technologies can play a role in mitigating and207preventing risks to pipeline infrastructure.208    For example, how might artificial intelligence be used to209best detect areas of pipeline infrastructure that should be210inspected after severe weather or shifts in environmental211conditions like landslides or earthquakes, or where extensive212strain or shifts in pressure have occurred?213    We do not know what incident may knock on our door next,214but I believe investing in our country's ability to research215and develop the next innovative application of technology or216new technologies themselves will arm us with the tools to keep217our pipelines and infrastructure safe.218    And we should be fostering an environment that allows219industry to explore different means to keep pipelines safe.220Indiana has been at the forefront of adopting innovative221monitoring technologies and fostering partnerships between222relevant parties to enhance safety and preparedness.223    But we need to ensure our country across the board can look224forward and innovate new solutions to increase safety, too.225    So thank you again to our witnesses for your expertise and226willingness to contribute to this dialog. I now recognize the227Ranking Member, Mr. Peters.228229                STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,230                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN231232    Senator Peters. Well, thank you. Thank you, Chairman Young,233and certainly appreciate the opportunity to work with you again234on other issues and I look forward to working on this one235because it is particularly important, and that is why I want to236thank all of our witnesses for being here today.237    And I can say for sure that this is an issue that hits home238very directly for my state. In Michigan we understand all too239well the lasting damage an oil spill can cause.240    In 2010 a pipeline ruptured in Marshall, releasing over 1241million gallons of oil into the Kalamazoo River. This was the242largest inland oil spill in the United States' history and it243took years as well as over $1 billion to clean up.244    As many of you know, Michigan is also home to Enbridge Line2455, a 70-year-old oil and gas pipeline that crosses through the246Great Lakes.247    The Great Lakes is a source of drinking water for over 40248million people and that line underneath the Straits of Mackinac249is particularly concerning.250    In fact, a pipeline failure there would be nothing short of251catastrophic. The University of Michigan experts have actually252identified the Straits of Mackinac as the single worst place253for an oil spill in the entire Great Lakes basin and,254unfortunately, we have had some very close calls in the past.255    In 2014, Enbridge found gaps in the protective coating on a256segment of the pipeline underneath the Straits. In 2018, the257pipeline was badly damaged by a boat anchor that was dragged258along the lake bottom, resulting in three gouges to the259pipeline.260    And in 2020 Enbridge discovered that a Line 5 anchor261support had been mangled and that the pipeline had physically262shifted, and that part of its protective coating had been263completely removed, exposing bare metal.264    In the midst of these incidents, in 2017 the then265Commandant of the Coast Guard told me flat out at a hearing266when I asked him the question--he told me flat out that the267agency was not prepared for an oil spill in the Great Lakes and268that more research was needed to improve our response.269    That is when I led efforts to establish the Great Lakes270Center of Expertise. The Center of Expertise will conduct271research and develop responses to ensure that we are prepared272to quickly and effectively address an oil spill in the Great273Lakes.274    But rather than having to utilize the Center's knowledge275during a worst case scenario, I would certainly rather have a276situation where we never have to deal with a spill in the first277place and never have to respond to a Line 5 incident or another278case like we saw in the Kalamazoo River.279    Simply put, we need standards. We need standards in place280to ensure that these sorts of events never happen, and while281pipelines are a widely adopted mode of transporting hazardous282materials there are still safety concerns associated with their283use.284    Over the past 20 years the pipeline incidents have caused285257 deaths, over 1,000 injuries, and over $11 billion in286damages.287    That is to say we still have a heck of a lot of work to do288when it comes to safety, because I do not think you will find289too many folks in Michigan that hear those numbers that in any290way think we are at mission accomplished.291    They certainly want to make sure that their families and292communities will be safe in the future, and that is why I hope293we will all keep on top of mind during this hearing and294throughout the pipeline safety reauthorization process that295safety is always paramount and as such there can be no296backsliding on safety in any reauthorization bill that we put297forward.298    I look forward to working with Chairman Young as I have299over the last few years. I look forward to working with our300witnesses that are here today, PHMSA, our state agencies, and301other stakeholders to make sure that this pipeline safety302reauthorization effort is better and it better protects303Michigan, our Great Lakes, as well as the Nation as a whole,304and I am certainly very optimistic we can do that.305    I yield back.306    Senator Young. Well, thank you again, Senator Peters, for307your leadership on this issue.308    I am going to go ahead and introduce briefly each of our309witnesses and then ask you to make your opening statements.310    They are in order Mr. Robin Rorick, Vice President of311Midstream Policy, the American Petroleum Institute; Mr. Andrew312J. Black, President and CEO of Liquid Energy Pipeline313Association; Mr. Richard Leger--how do you say it, sir?314    Mr. Richard--that was my second choice. Mr. Richard Leger,315Senior Vice President of Natural Gas Business, CenterPoint316Energy on behalf of the American Gas Association. Thank you,317sir.318    And Mr. Bill Caram. Caram?319    Mr. Caram. Caram. You got it.320    Senator Young. Yes. OK. Executive Director of Pipeline321Safety Trust. Thank you, sir.322    So I recognize Mr. Robin Rorick for your opening statement.323Five minutes, sir.324325STATEMENT OF ROBIN RORICK, VICE PRESIDENT OF MIDSTREAM POLICY,326                  AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE327328    Mr. Rorick. Thank you.329    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters, members of the330Subcommittee, thank you for the invitation today.331    My name is Robin Rorick and I am Vice President of332Midstream Policy at the American Petroleum Institute. API333represents all segments of America's oil and natural gas334industry, from integrated global companies to independent335producers, supporting 11 million jobs across all 50 states.336    Pipelines make it possible to safely deliver the affordable337energy our families, businesses, and economy rely on day and338night.339    With over 3 million miles of pipelines crisscrossing340America, the safe and reliable transport of oil and natural gas341is essential not just to America's economy but to our national342security.343    Pipelines operators know safety must always come first. Our344goal is clear, zero incidents, and we are making progress.345Recent data from PHMSA confirms this.346    Between 2020 and 2024 liquid pipeline incidents affecting347people or the environment dropped 13 percent. Incident rates348per million barrels delivered fell by 33 percent since 2019349even as mileage and delivery volumes increased.350    Similarly, natural gas transmission incidents have declined35123 percent since 2020. These results did not happen by chance.352    A regulatory foundation coupled with the adoption and353continual updating of API's industry safety standards has354played a major role in this continuous improvement across the355industry.356    In fact, API has developed more than 800 standards, many of357which are used globally to improve pipeline safety and358environmental protection. But to fully leverage their benefits359PHMSA must routinely and efficiently incorporate updated360standards into Federal regulations.361    Currently, approximately half of API standards cited in362PHMSA rules are outdated. Congress should direct PHMSA to363commit to reviewing and updating its references to standards364every 3 years.365    If an updated standard is not adopted the agency should366publicly explain why to provide clarity on its perspective and367help industry determine a path forward to ideally avoid368conflict between the standard and the regulation.369    More broadly, we appreciate PHMSA's recent efforts toward370regulatory reform, in particular the agency's consideration of371updating and modernizing repair criteria for hazardous liquid372and natural gas pipelines and allowing for the use of risk-373based inspections for PHMSA regulated breakout tanks.374    But Congress can help accelerate further safety375improvements on multiple fronts. First, Congress should direct376PHMSA to update pipeline operating statuses.377    Today, pipelines are categorized only as active or378abandoned. We need an official status for idle pipelines379clearly defined using API's Recommended Practice 1181.380    This common sense update would allow pipeline operators to381safely pause certain activities when risk levels are lower,382aligning regulation with real world operational needs.383    We also see significant room to standardize the damage384prevention processes across the country by incorporating385leading industry practices, reducing exemptions, and improving386enforcement.387    There are also opportunities to streamline the regulatory388process itself, especially in PHMSA's pipeline inspection389program. Currently, operators often undergo repetitive390inspections by multiple Federal, state, and community391authorities reviewing the same procedures.392    These redundant efforts consume valuable time and resources393which could be better directed toward safety improvements. API394supports an independent evaluation of PHMSA's inspection395processes to identify ways to streamline inspections, improve396collaboration, and maintain a laser focus on achieving safety397outcomes.398    Beyond these priorities, several complementary regulatory399improvements would enhance pipeline safety and operations such400as reforming PHMSA's special permit process, strengthening401criminal penalties for vandalism, clarifying jurisdictional402overlaps for implant piping, and ensuring responsible right-of-403way maintenance through conservation and habitat management404programs.405    In closing, I want to stress that America leads the world406in oil and natural gas production and pipelines are central to407this success. The improvements we have seen in pipeline safety408are significant but our industry remains committed to doing409even more.410    As Congress works to reauthorize PHMSA, API urges the411adoption of smart updated references to standards in the412regulations, completion of overdue rulemakings, and413streamlining inspections. These steps will help America safely414meet growing energy demands and demonstrate leadership to the415world.416    Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look417forward to your questions and your continued bipartisan work to418advance pipeline safety and elevate American energy leadership.419    [The prepared statement of Mr. Rorick follows:]420421 Prepared Statement of Robin Rorick, Vice President, Midstream Policy,422                      American Petroleum Institute423Introduction424    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters and esteemed members of the425subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. My426name is Robin Rorick, and I am the Vice President of Midstream Policy427at the American Petroleum Institute (API). On behalf of API, I am428honored to have this opportunity to submit testimony as part of this429important hearing on pipeline safety and the reauthorization of the430Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety431Administration (PHMSA).432    API is a national trade association representing all segments of433America's oil and natural gas industry. From large integrated companies434to small independent operators, 11 million hardworking men and women435across all 50 states provide and support the energy that powers every436district in this Nation.\1\ API has developed more than 800 standards437that enhance operational safety, environmental protection and438sustainability across 140 countries. Promoting technological,439environmental and regulatory innovations is a driving force for API and440our industry to ensure we have safe, reliable and affordable energy441that tens of millions of families and businesses need to survive and442thrive, today and well into the future.443---------------------------------------------------------------------------444    \1\ PwC for API, ``Impacts of the Oil and Natural Gas Industry on445the U.S. Economy in 2021,'' available at: https://www.api.org/-/media/446Files/Policy/American-Energy/PwC/2023/API-PWC-Economic-Impact-Report-4472023.pdf448---------------------------------------------------------------------------449    The U.S. remains the world's leader in oil and natural gas450production, providing immense benefits not only to our citizens here in451the U.S. but also to our allies across the world. Pipelines make these452capabilities a reality, and they play a critical role in achieving the453goals of energy dominance and energy security. Our nation's network of454over 500,000 miles of oil, petroleum products and natural gas455transmission pipelines transport the energy we rely on every day to456fuel modern life. As one of the safest, most environmentally457responsible ways to transport energy to families and businesses,458pipelines are in every U.S. state and total over 13 million miles459across the country. They reliably connect areas of production with460refineries and processing centers, and ultimately with airports,461manufacturers, gas stations, farms, businesses and homes.462Pipeline Safety Improvements463    The pipeline industry is committed to safety and continuous464improvement, which includes maintaining a standard of operational465excellence through comprehensive safety management systems, pipeline466design and construction standards and specifications, and robust safety467programs such as integrity management and geohazard mitigation. Data468from PHMSA illustrates that this daily commitment is showing results.469Both total liquid pipeline incidents as well as those impacting people470or the environment decreased 13 percent between 2020 and 2024.\2\471Looking further, integrity management incidents for liquid pipelines472dropped 33 percent, and operations and maintenance incidents declined47322 percent within this time. These safety improvements come as the474industry operated 3,000 more miles of liquid pipeline and delivered475over 15 percent more barrels of liquids between 2019 and 2023, the most476recent year this data is available. In fact, the rate of total477incidents per million barrels of energy delivered has fallen 33 percent478since 2019, showing that liquid pipelines are getting safer while479meeting increasing energy demand. Natural gas transmission lines are480showing similar safety improvements, with incidents down 23 percent481between 2020 and 2024.482---------------------------------------------------------------------------483    \2\ ``2024 Pipeline Performance Report & 2023-2025 Pipeline484Excellence Strategic Plan,'' available at API/LEPA 2024 Performance485Report486---------------------------------------------------------------------------487    While we are proud of this progress, pipeline operators recognize488the need to remain vigilant in continuous improvement. Our industry489continues to voluntarily implement safety management systems and490reinforce safety culture through a comprehensive framework to manage491risk. It has undertaken initiatives to mitigate pipeline corrosion,492improve leak detection tools and technologies, prevent cyberattacks,493promote sustainable operations using conservation programs and advocate494for risk-based tank inspections--capitalizing on the use of the latest495industry standards and advanced technologies. Following the publication496of a first-of-its-kind industry standard on public engagement,497Recommended Practice (RP) 1185, pipeline operators are actively working498on implementation, fostering meaningful, two-way communication and499trust-building within the communities where we work and live.500Additionally, with the expected growth in the construction of carbon501dioxide (CO2) pipelines, we are working on maximizing the502safe transportation of CO2 by pipeline through the503publication of a new RP for transportation of CO2 by504pipeline this year.505    As part of our efforts to promote pipeline safety improvements, API506has responded to a recent U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)507Request for Information (RFI) seeking comments to assist DOT in508identifying existing regulations, guidance, paperwork requirements or509other regulatory obligations that could be modified or repealed to510improve pipeline safety and eliminate unnecessary burdens. In our511response to the RFI, which was jointly filed with the Liquid Energy512Pipeline Association, we identified numerous opportunities for updating513outdated and inefficient regulations that should reflect the current514state of technology, engineering science and advanced analytical tools,515focus resources on the highest risk items and support a performance-516based approach to managing pipeline safety. PHMSA has stated that the517Administration plans to issue an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking518(ANPRM) to gather information in support of a planned future rulemaking519to modernize pipeline repair requirements for liquids and natural gas520pipelines to improve safety and efficiency, and API plans to submit a521response to the ANPRM as well.522    Energy demand is growing, placing this industry at an inflection523point. The reshoring of advanced manufacturing in the U.S., coupled524with the installation and operations of data centers and energy525consumption from artificial intelligence utilization, will only526increase demand. Our industry continues to work with federal, state and527local policymakers and regulators to protect the environment and528communities where we live and work. We welcome this opportunity to529demonstrate American energy leadership, building off the progress we530have already achieved, to meet ever-increasing demand using smart,531predictable and commonsense energy policies.532API Supports PHMSA Reauthorization533Recognizing the Importance of Standards534    As Congress considers the reauthorization of PHMSA and pipeline535safety programs, we encourage policymakers to enact legislation that536maximizes our industry's investments in people and technology to537effectively advance pipeline safety. We support comprehensive,538bipartisan efforts to help make our Nation's pipeline network safer as539it provides reliable energy supply to every community in America. It is540thus imperative that the regulatory environment remains cognizant of541and responsive to both current and potential future safety challenges542faced by operators.543    API supports timely and more frequent updates for industry544standards that are incorporated by reference into PHMSA regulations.545Since 1924, API has been the leader in developing voluntary, consensus-546based, internationally recognized standards covering all segments of547the oil and natural gas industry. Our standards are the most widely548cited petroleum industry standards by state regulators, with 240 API549standards cited over 3,800 times in state-based regulations. There are550more than 650 references to API standards in Federal regulations and551more than 1,300 international references.\3\ These standards are552reviewed at least every five years through API's American National553Standards Institute-accredited process and revised and improved as part554of industry's continuous learning culture when improvement or555advancements, such as in technology and innovation, are warranted.556However, regulators struggle to keep pace with the advances in pipeline557safety technology and modern engineering practices that are regularly558incorporated into these standards; approximately 50 percent of the559instances where PHMSA cites API standards in its regulations remain out560of date and do not reference the most recent edition. As a result,561critical safety regulations may fail to reflect advances in safety,562technology and engineering, forcing operators to comply with often563antiquated practices. Instead, Congress should direct PHMSA to review564standards that have been incorporated by reference every three years on565a routine basis through the Gas Pipeline Advisory Committee (GPAC) and566Liquid Pipeline Advisory Committee (LPAC) process to determine if567updates are needed. If PHMSA chooses to ignore an updated standard and568proceed without an update, PHMSA should publish an explanation of this569decision on the agency's website.570---------------------------------------------------------------------------571    \3\ OGP Report No. 426, Regulators' Use of Standards, March 2010 &572``Participate in API Standards Development'', available at https://573www.api.org/-/media/apiwebsite/products-and-services/2025_intnl-574usage_report_web-final.pdf575---------------------------------------------------------------------------576    Similarly, PHMSA should allow operators to base breakout tank577inspection frequency on risk modeling as outlined by the 5th edition of578API Standard 653. Operators are investing in the latest tank coatings579and liners, applying advanced materials engineering principles to580reduce the risk of leaks and utilizing drone and robotics capabilities581to improve tank inspection effectiveness. Yet, PHMSA has not adapted to582encourage innovation and future investment by incorporating the latest583version of this standard, instead requiring unnecessary inspections and584failing to prioritize safety. Directing PHMSA to update its regulations585concerning tank inspections will maintain the current safety level586while minimizing occupational safety risks and environmental impacts587associated with breakout tank inspections.588Completing Outstanding Rulemakings589    API applauds PHMSA's efforts to date to advance regulatory reform590and consider rulemakings that recognize the important role that leading591industry practices, innovation and technology play in advancing safety.592API also supports PHMSA's recent submission of an advanced notice of593proposed rulemaking on modernizing repair criteria to the Office of594Management and Budget and planned publication of a rulemaking on class595location, both reflecting their commitment to updating outdated and596overly prescriptive regulations. Even so, API welcomes this597subcommittee's role in facilitating PHMSA action on other important598rulemakings. Congress should direct PHMSA to initiate a rulemaking on599pipeline operating status that would incorporate the 1st edition of API600RP 1181, Pipeline Operational Status Determination, an outstanding601mandate from the PIPES Act of 2020. A rulemaking is necessary to create602a new operating status for pipelines that are ``idled,'' in addition to603the ``active'' and ``abandoned'' status currently recognized by the604agency. PHMSA should specify which operations and maintenance605activities an operator can defer to maintain safety while accounting606for the lower risk posed by ``idled'' pipelines, consistent with the607agency's 2016 Advisory Bulletin.608    Additionally, we invite Congressional direction to PHMSA to update609existing pipeline safety regulations for CO2 transportation610by pipeline (49 CFR Part 195). Current regulations cover the design,611construction and operations of supercritical CO2 pipelines,612but there remains a gap in gas-phase CO2 transportation by613pipeline, and there are recognized opportunities for improving the614current regulations. PHMSA recently published a draft version of a615notice of proposed rulemaking to improve existing pipeline safety616regulations for the transportation of CO2 by pipeline which617was withdrawn as part of the Trump administration regulatory freeze. We618encourage this subcommittee to support moving this proposed rulemaking619forward as the development of CO2 pipeline infrastructure is620an important element of API member companies' commitment to emission621reduction and environmental performance while maximizing oil recovery.622API expects to publish an industry consensus standard on the623transportation of CO2 by pipeline, which could be624incorporated into PHMSA regulation by reference and provide a framework625for safe transportation of CO2 by pipeline.626Other Critical Provisions for Consideration627    There are other areas that we believe the subcommittee should628evaluate for consideration during reauthorization, including criminal629penalties for vandalism, attacks on construction sites and other630activities that disrupt service, inspection protocols and631jurisdictional issues. Current law only allows for penalties for632``damaging or destroying'' interstate pipelines, and new legislation633could better protect critical facilities and deter criminal behavior634that poses a safety hazard to people and the environment. Legislation635should also codify operators' ability to maintain rights-of-way using636conservation, habitat management and other related programs, enhancing637pipeline safety while benefiting local communities and the environment.638    Multiple repetitive and often redundant inspections are conducted639by PHMSA regional offices, state regulatory agencies, and local640authorities, all evaluating the same set of company procedures and641programs. Having a process for better coordination among regulators642could improve efficiency for the regulatory agencies themselves while643also allowing operators to focus finite resources on improving safety644programs rather than repeatedly reviewing them. API supports PHMSA645undergoing an independent evaluation of its inspection programs and646streamlining of its special permit process to identify opportunities647for improved collaboration to reduce inefficiency, maximize resources648and reduce delays in permit issuance.649    API also encourages this subcommittee to clarify jurisdiction and650improve multi-agency jurisdiction. Short segments of pipeline within651gas processing and refining facilities, known as ``in-plant'' piping,652may cross a street or railroad in the public domain to transfer653products from one process unit of a refinery to another. While the654Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulates liquid655in-plant piping, there is regulatory uncertainty for its gas656counterparts. These gas lines, often in the same right-of-way as liquid657lines, can lead to jurisdictional overlaps, uncertainty, and disputes,658requiring subcommittee action to address them the same way as liquid659pipes and to clarify OSHA's jurisdiction. Additionally, Congress should660clarify regulatory jurisdiction over liquified natural gas facilities.661A joint memorandum of understanding and recurring working group between662PHMSA, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Coast663Guard would improve multi-agency coordination and minimize duplicative664regulatory oversight to maintain American energy dominance, both here665at home as well as for our allies abroad.666Safely Demonstrating American Energy Leadership667    As the world leader in both oil and natural gas production as well668as emissions reductions, America is demonstrating energy leadership669every day. For our country to continue this leadership and achieve the670goal of energy dominance, Congress should consider policies that671capitalize on the power of America's oil, natural gas and other672resources in the reauthorization of the Pipeline Safety Act. Fit-for-673purpose regulations based on facts and backed by sound science and674engineering principles have enabled our country's record-breaking675production and emissions reductions through the transportation of676energy in one of the safest and most environmentally responsible modes677possible. The provisions offered today through this testimony will678maximize our investment in state-of-the-art technology and sustainable679operations while recognizing the important role our communities play in680advancing safety.681    While operators are proud of their safety record, we remain682committed to continuous safety improvement. Pipeline safety is not a683partisan issue, and API remains eager to partner with Federal and state684legislators and policymakers to help ensure pipelines are regulated685effectively, efficiently and operated safely. Importantly, though, any686regulations must be balanced to ensure that the industry can achieve687these objectives while continuing to bring affordable, reliable energy688to American families and businesses. To that end, API has responded to689DOT's request for information on modernizing the regulatory framework690and looks forward to continuing our engagement with PHMSA and691congressional staff on promoting regulatory reform. Only with an692effective Pipeline Safety Act and regulatory approach can our industry693meet the dual challenge of answering the growth in energy demand while694improving safety and environmental protection.695    Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member and distinguished members of the696subcommittee, thank you for this hearing to discuss industry's pipeline697safety efforts and priorities moving forward. I look forward to the698continued bipartisan efforts to pass a comprehensive Pipeline Safety699Act and working together with all of you to demonstrate American energy700leadership and dominance for years to come.701702    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Rorick.703    Mr. Black, you are recognized for 5 minutes.704705            STATEMENT OF ANDREW J. BLACK, PRESIDENT706707                  AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,708709               LIQUID ENERGY PIPELINE ASSOCIATION710711    Mr. Black. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member.712    I am Andy Black, President and CEO of the Liquid Energy713Pipeline Association. LEPA represents pipeline owners and714operators delivering transportation fuels like gasoline,715diesel, jet fuel, transportation feed stocks like crude oil,716home heating fuels like propane and heating oil, industrial717feed stocks like ethane and butane, and low-carbon solutions718like renewable diesel, LP gas, and carbon dioxide.719    We have over 50 member companies delivering over 20 billion720barrels annually across a nearly 230,000-mile network of721pipelines.722    The states of every member of this subcommittee play a role723in delivering, by pipeline, the energy Americans need and want.724    Pipelines deliver energy from where it is produced,725especially in states like Alaska, Texas, New Mexico, to where726that energy is turned into useful products like refineries in727Michigan, Texas, Indiana, Mississippi, Ohio, Illinois, and New728Jersey.729    Different liquid pipelines then carry those refined730products to local regions across America, pipelines serving731America across states like South Dakota, Nebraska, and732Missouri.733    Even if energy products travel those last miles by truck or734ship to states like West Virginia, Hawaii, or Massachusetts,735that energy had to travel at least some point on a pipeline.736    Indiana, the Subcommittee Chair's home state, is a terrific737example of the importance of pipelines. As a crossroads for738America, Indiana is also a crossroads of pipelines.739    Crude oil pipelines cross Indiana to deliver to refineries740in Gary, Mount Vernon, in neighboring Ohio and Michigan.741Refined products pipelines deliver gasoline, diesel, and jet742fuel from these refineries to major population centers across743Indiana.744    Natural gas liquids pipelines deliver propane from as far745away as Texas to homes across rural Indiana and elsewhere.746Pipeline-delivered propane is also vital to the farmers of747Indiana and other states, drying crops after harvest and748keeping barns warm in the winter.749    As this committee considers the role of pipeline750infrastructure and what changes to make to Federal pipeline751safety laws it is important to recognize that pipelines are the752safest way to deliver energy.753    More than 99.999 percent of crude oil and petroleum754products delivered by pipeline reaches its destination safely.755    A report prepared for Congress by PHMSA analyzing 10 years756of incident data found that pipelines were 13 times safer than757both trains and trucks with pipelines experiencing only one758incident for every 720 million gallons delivered.759    An Obama administration analysis found that rejecting a760major pipeline and shipping the same crude oil by rail would761increase the risk of oil release by over 800 times and a barrel762is released by 2.6 times.763    Current PHMSA pipeline incident statistics also show that764pipeline safety is improving. According to publicly available765PHMSA data, total liquid pipeline incidents are down 13 percent766over the last 5 years and liquid pipeline incidents impacting767people or the environment are also down 13 percent over the768last 5 years.769    Declining pipeline incidents over the last 5 years supports770a measured approach to reauthorizing pipeline safety laws771without major changes or new mandates.772    LEPA believes Congress can do more to help modernize773pipeline safety programs. Key parts of PHMSA's safety774regulations are over 20 years old and do not reflect the latest775advances in safety technology or know-how.776    LEPA recognizes that America is blessed with an abundance777of energy. Smart pipeline policies will promote pipeline energy778infrastructure needed to deliver American energy dominance.779    LEPA believes Congress can help PHMSA increase the780effectiveness and transparency of its pipeline safety programs781and requirements.782    We welcome the Committee's interest in pipeline safety783reauthorization. My written testimony details the many784provisions LEPA supports. I will name five.785    Number one, reforming PHMSA's special permit program.786    Number two, strengthening penalties for pipeline safety787violations that impair operation of facilities or damage788construction sites.789    Number three, establish inspection and maintenance required790for idled pipelines after Congress directed PHMSA to do so and791it did not.792    Number four, reauthorize, this time without extraneous793conditions, a PHMSA technology demonstration pilot program to794restore the will of Congress and harness the latest high-tech795inspection technologies without bureaucratic red tape.796    And number five, allow risk-based inspections of in-service797breakout tanks to reduce worker safety threats, avoid air798pollutant emissions, minimize unnecessary greenhouse gas799emissions, and prevent creation of hazardous waste, conforming800PHMSA's regulations with that of EPA.801    Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before you802today on the benefits of pipelines including their safety.803    [The prepared statement of Mr. Black follows:]804805 Prepared Statement of Andrew J. Black, President and Chief Executive806              Officer, Liquid Energy Pipeline Association807    Thank you, Chair, Ranking Member, and members of the subcommittee.808My name is Andy Black and I am President and CEO of the Liquid Energy809Pipeline Association. LEPA represents pipeline owners and operators810delivering transportation fuels like gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel,811transportation feedstocks like crude oil, home heating fuels like812propane and home heating oil, industrial feedstocks like ethane and813butane, and low carbon solutions like renewable diesel, liquified814petroleum gas and carbon dioxide. We have over 50 member companies815delivering over 20 billion barrels annually across a nearly a 230,000-816mile network of pipelines.817    Thank you for holding this hearing today and highlighting the vital818role this Committee has promoting the infrastructure that leads to819American prosperity. Liquid energy pipelines deliver transportation820fuels like gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel that families, commuters,821businesses and travelers use to drive and fly where they need to go.822Pipelines deliver transportation fuel feedstocks like crude oil and823industrial feedstocks like ethane, propane and butane to make824everything from plastics to pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, paints and825fabrics. Rural home heating and agricultural fuels like propane826delivered regionally by pipeline before traveling locally by truck heat827rural homes and farms, dry crops after harvest, and keep livestock828barns warm throughout the winter.829    Every constituent of every member of this Subcommittee in some way830depends on pipelines to meet the needs of their daily lives. From831Alaska to Mississippi, from Massachusetts to New Mexico, even in832Hawaii, Americans benefit from pipeline delivered energy. Pipelines833deliver energy from where it is produced, especially in states like834Alaska, Texas and New Mexico, to where that energy is turned into835useful products, like refineries in Texas, Indiana, Mississippi, Ohio,836Illinois and New Jersey. Different liquids pipelines then carry those837refined products to local regions across America. Pipelines serving838America cross states like South Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri. Even if839energy products travel those last miles by truck or ship to states like840West Virginia, Hawaii or Massachusetts, that energy had to travel at841some point on a pipeline.842    Indiana, the Subcommittee Chair's home state, is a terrific example843of the importance of pipelines. As a crossroads for America, Indiana is844also a crossroads of pipelines. Crude oil pipelines cross Indiana to845deliver to refineries in Gary, Mt Vernon and neighboring Ohio and846Michigan. Refined products pipelines deliver gasoline, diesel and jet847fuel from these refineries to major population areas across Indiana.848Natural gas liquids pipelines deliver propane from as far away as Texas849to homes across rural Indiana. Pipeline delivered propane is also vital850to the farmers of Indiana keeping barns warm in the winter and drying851crops after harvest. LEPA member companies operating pipelines in852Indiana include BP, Buckeye, Citgo, Enbridge, Enterprise, Explorer,853Flint Hills, Marathon, Kinder Morgan, Energy Transfer, Tallgrass,854Valero and Wolverine (click on map image for link to view file).855856[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]857858    When thinking about energy, the American people, including those in859Indiana, tell us what they care most about is safety, followed by860affordability and reliability. Each year, LEPA commissions a nationwide861poll of public sentiment on energy and pipelines. The American public's862preference for safe energy supports this Committee's work to863reauthorize Federal pipeline safety law.864    As the Committee considers the role of pipeline infrastructure and865what changes to make to Federal pipeline safety laws, it is important866to remember pipelines are the safest way to deliver energy. More than86799.999 percent of crude oil and petroleum products delivered by868pipeline reaches its destination safely.869870[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]871872    A 2018 report prepared for Congress by PHMSA analyzing 10 years of873incident data found pipelines were 13 times safer than both trains and874trucks with pipelines experiencing 1 incident for every 720 million875gallons delivered and rail incidents occurring every 50 million gallons876delivered. An Obama administration analysis found rejecting a major877pipeline and shipping the same crude oil by rail would increase the878risk of oil release by over 800 times and barrels released by 2.6879times.880    Current PHMSA pipeline incident statistics also show pipeline881safety is improving. Federal law and regulations require operators to882report pipeline incident data to PHMSA. Full year data for 2024 is now883available, which allows us to examine current trends in pipeline884safety.885886[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]887888    According to publicly available PHMSA data, total liquids pipeline889incidents are down 13 percent over the last 5 years. Liquids pipeline890incidents Impacting People or the Environment (IPE) are also down 13891percent over the last 5 years. When comparing incidents to volume892delivered, the decrease is even more striking, with liquids pipeline893incidents per barrel delivered down 33 percent over the preceding 5894years. Or put another way, liquids pipeline incidents are decreasing at895the same time America's pipelines are delivering more and more energy.896    These safety metrics are available in a new report, the API-LEPA8972024 Pipeline Performance Report & 2023-2025 Pipeline Excellence898Strategic Plan. Each year, LEPA and API download PHMSA incident data to899check on how we are doing, where we are doing well and where we need900improvement. Those areas of need, both appearing in the data and901collected through engagement of our stakeholders, help guide industry-902wide safety initiatives. In this report, you can see how the liquids903pipeline industry is addressing key challenges like corrosion, leak904detection and geohazards. You can see how operators are improving905pipeline by harnessing new technologies, artificial intelligence,906safety management systems and new recommended practices. You can also907see how we are trying to do better on public engagement, cybersecurity,908conservation and attracting our future workforce.909    Declining pipeline incidents over the last 5 years supports a910measured approach to reauthorizing pipeline safety laws without major911changes or new mandates. LEPA does believe Congress can do more to help912modernize pipeline safety programs. Hi-tech inspection and analytical913tools, like an MRI or ultrasound in the doctor's office, are available914for pipeline safety. Analytic methods harnessing machine learning and915other forms of artificial intelligence can help operators digest data916to show when a pipeline might be leaking or when it needs new917maintenance. However, key parts of PHMSA safety regulations are over 20918years old and do not reflect the latest advances in safety technology919or know-how.920    LEPA also recognizes that America is blessed with an abundance of921energy. Pipelines are the vital link from where that energy is922produced, to where it is refined into usable products, and on to923consumers and businesses in their home regions. Smart pipeline policies924will promote the pipeline energy infrastructure needed to deliver925American energy dominance. Lastly, LEPA believes Congress can help926PHMSA increase the effectiveness and transparency of its pipeline927safety programs and requirements. The administration is proposing928regulatory actions to help PHMSA become a smarter, more efficient, more929modern regulatory agency and Congress can support those efforts.930    LEPA welcomes pipeline safety reauthorization provisions that931would:932933   Reform PHMSA's Special Permit program to impose permit934        review shot clock and limit unrelated permit requirements935936   Strengthen penalties for pipeline safety violations that937        impair operation of facilities or damage construction sites938939   Fulfill the 2020 Congressional mandate of a safety program940        for idled pipelines941942   Reauthorize without extraneous conditions a PHMSA technology943        demonstration pilot program944945   Provide defendants the opportunity for a formal PHMSA946        hearing, and protect security or commercially sensitive947        information presented as evidence in PHMSA hearings open to the948        public949950   Authorize a Voluntary Information Sharing program to convene951        stakeholders to collaborate on safety initiatives, similar to952        FAA's successful program953954   Allow risk-based inspections of in-service breakout tanks to955        reduce unnecessary greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions,956        worker safety threats, and hazardous waste when shown to957        achieve an equivalent level of safety958959   Increase the transparency of PHMSA inspection program with960        reporting on inspection priorities, dates and locations961962   Require PHMSA review of consensus safety improvement963        standards964965   Provide a targeted update of Federal CO2 pipeline966        requirements to extend regulatory coverage to gaseous967        CO2 and require CO2-specific incident968        dispersion modeling (topography, weather, operating conditions,969        trace compounds)970971    An additional note on leveraging new technologies that provides a972case study on the frustrating reality of bureaucracy and red tape in973government. In the 2020 PIPES Act, Congress recognized pipeline safety974could benefit from harnessing the latest hi-tech inspection975technologies and analytics. As I mentioned, there's so much modern976technology and analytics like artificial intelligence can benefit977pipeline safety. Congress authorized PHMSA to conduct a pipeline safety978technology demonstration pilot program under certain conditions.979    However, in implementing the technology demonstration program,980PHMSA under the previous administration imposed a host of additional981administrative, regulatory and legal conditions beyond what Congress982itself mandated. As a result, PHMSA received no applications to conduct983technology pilots and the program sunsetted. Pipeline operators cited984the additional conditions PHMSA imposed in its implementation guidance985as making the program infeasible. PHMSA bureaucratic red tape986effectively strangled this program in its crib. An opportunity now987exists and LEPA supports restoring the will of Congress and988reauthorizing this program without additional bureaucratic red tape or989conditions.990    Thank you again for the Committee's support of pipeline energy991infrastructure and the opportunity to testify before you today on the992benefits of pipelines, including their safety.993994    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Black.995    Mr. Leger, you are recognized for five minutes.996997       STATEMENT OF RICHARD LEGER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT,998999           NATURAL GAS BUSINESS, CENTERPOINT ENERGY,10001001           ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN GAS ASSOCIATION10021003    Mr. Leger. Thank you, Chairman.1004    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters, members of the1005Subcommittee, I am Richard Leger, Senior Vice President of1006Natural Gas Business for CenterPoint Energy, testifying on1007behalf of the American Natural Gas Association.1008    AGA represents more than 200 utilities that deliver natural1009gas to 74 million customers. Natural gas pipelines deliver1010essential energy to 177 million Americans through a 2.51011million-mile pipeline system including 2.2 million miles of1012local distribution pipelines operated by natural gas utilities.1013    An integral part of this Nation's pipeline infrastructure,1014CenterPoint Energy operates 74,000 miles of distribution1015pipeline and is privileged to serve nearly 4 million customers1016in Indiana, Texas, Ohio, and Minnesota. We also manage nearly10171,100 miles of transmission lines and approximately 300 storage1018wells.1019    In 2024, we delivered 571 BCF to our customers, and during1020the January 21st winter storm where Minnesotans experienced 621021consecutive hours below zero we successfully delivered 1.5 BCF,1022which is the equivalent of 460 gigawatt hours of energy1023delivered, representing more than the electric capacity for the1024state of Minnesota.1025    Gas utility distribution pipelines are the last critical1026link in the delivery chain that brings natural gas from the1027wellhead to the burner tip. Companies like CenterPoint Energy1028are the face of the natural gas industry.1029    We live in the communities that we serve. We interact daily1030with both customers and state authorities who oversee pipeline1031safety locally. They are our customers, our neighbors, our1032friends, and our family.1033    As such, pipeline safety is and must be our number-one1034priority. The primary safety tool for gas utility operators is1035a Distribution Integrity Management Program, or DIMP.1036    DIMP is a regulatory process that allows an operator to1037develop a safety plan that addresses the unique operating1038characteristics of their individual gas system.1039    From a CenterPoint perspective, each of our four systems1040have different operating environments, customer requirements,1041and infrastructure needs. DIMP allows us to appropriately plan1042and prioritize pipeline safety, resiliency, and reliability1043work that strengthens each of our unique individual systems.1044    Upgrading distribution pipelines is also critical to1045pipeline safety. Forty-three states and the District of1046Columbia have expedited pipeline replacement programs.1047    In the past 17 years the amount of cast iron and bare steel1048pipeline replacement in use has declined over 50 percent,1049replaced by newer technology pipelines which increase system1050safety and reliability.1051    CenterPoint Energy is investing hundreds of millions of1052dollars every year to modernize our gas systems to enhance1053safety and reliability. For example, we will eliminate cast1054iron and bare steel from our systems by the end of 2026 and we1055will modernize our remaining low pressure systems by 2030.1056    The natural gas distribution industry has proved it can1057simultaneously increase natural gas delivery and improve safety1058but more needs to be done.1059    CenterPoint natural gas utilities support the following1060concepts in upcoming pipeline safety reauthorization1061legislation, policy priorities that will measurably improve1062pipeline safety and industry operations.1063    Number one, limiting serious injuries and fatalities,1064property damage, and environmental impacts caused by unintended1065excavation damage incidents.1066    Number two, strengthening criminal penalties on those who1067purposely sabotage or intentionally damage pipeline operations.1068    Number three, identifying technology alternatives that if1069utilized will meet the intent of existing pipeline safety1070regulations and provide an equal or greater level of pipeline1071safety.1072    Number four, study in how natural gas, hydrogen blending,1073and distribution systems worldwide are safely operated.1074    Number five, creating a voluntary information sharing1075system to collect and share pipeline safety, operational best1076practices, and lessons learned with industry partners.1077    And finally, number six, establishing a four- or preferably10785-year reauthorization period so PHMSA and industry have1079sufficient time to complete work authorized by the previous1080reauthorization.1081    CenterPoint Energy and AGA members support fact-based,1082reasonable, and practical updates to pipeline safety1083legislation that build upon lessons learned and evolving1084technologies.1085    In that spirit, we look forward to our continued work with1086this committee as well as your counterparts in the House of1087Representatives to help facilitate pipeline safety1088reauthorization legislation.1089    Please use us as a technical resource whenever and wherever1090we can be helpful. Thank you for the opportunity to participate1091in this hearing and I look forward to this conversation.1092    [The prepared statement of Mr. Leger follows:]10931094Prepared Statement of Richard Leger, Senior Vice President, Natural Gas1095Business, CenterPoint Energy, on behalf of the American Gas Association1096    On behalf of the American Gas Association (AGA), CenterPoint Energy1097is pleased to provide our input for the U.S. Senate Committee on1098Commerce, Science, & Transportation, Subcommittee on Surface1099Transportation, Freight, Pipelines, and Safety (Senator Todd Young,1100Chairman) hearing on Pipeline Safety Reauthorization: Ensuring the Safe1101and Efficient Movement of American Energy. CenterPoint Energy and AGA1102share the same goals as safety advocates, the public, pipeline sector1103industry partners, and Congress: Ensuring America's pipeline system1104remains the safest, most secure, and most reliable in the world. We1105look forward to working with the Committee in the 119th Congress to1106help push pipeline safety reauthorization through the legislative1107process and into law.1108    CenterPoint Energy is a combination electric and natural gas1109utility operating in Indiana, Texas, Ohio and Minnesota. Across our 4-1110state footprint, we operate nearly 74,000 miles of distribution main1111pipelines and are privileged to serve nearly 4 million customers. We1112also manage nearly 1,100 miles of transmission lines and approximately1113300 storage wells.1114    AGA, founded in 1918, represents more than 200 local energy1115companies that deliver natural gas throughout the United States. There1116are more than 77 million residential, commercial, and industrial1117natural gas customers in the U.S., of which 96 percent--more than 741118million customers--receive their gas from AGA members. AGA advocates1119for natural gas utility companies and their customers and provides a1120broad range of programs and services for member natural gas pipelines,1121marketers, gatherers, international natural gas companies, and industry1122associates. Today, natural gas meets more than one-third of the U.S.'1123energy needs. Natural gas pipelines are an essential part of the1124Nation's energy infrastructure. Indeed, natural gas is delivered to1125customers through a safe, approximately 2.7-million-mile underground1126pipeline system, including 2.3 million miles of local utility1127distribution pipelines, 100,000 miles of gathering lines, and 300,0001128miles of transmission pipelines providing service to more than 1891129million Americans.1130    Distribution pipelines are operated by natural gas utilities, or1131``local distribution companies (LDCs).'' Gas utility distribution pipes1132are the last, critical link in the natural gas delivery chain that1133brings natural gas from the wellhead to the burner tip. AGA member1134utilities like CenterPoint Energy are the ``face of the gas industry,''1135embedded in the communities they serve, and interact daily with1136customers and the state regulators who oversee pipeline safety locally.1137The distribution industry takes very seriously the responsibility of1138continuing to deliver natural gas to our families, neighbors, and1139business partners as safely, reliably, and responsibly as possible. The1140industry is committed to providing life-sustaining energy to the1141thousands of communities in our country who count on it, every second1142of every day of the year.1143Our Number One Priority: Pipeline Safety1144    The domestic shale revolution has resulted in an abundant supply of1145natural gas. This robust supply has translated into stable natural gas1146prices and an increasing number of utility customers who use this1147resource for residential and commercial applications like cooking,1148space and water heating, and manufacturing. Last year alone, natural1149gas utilities added 730,000 customers and 20,700 miles of pipeline to1150serve these new customers. Alongside this tremendous opportunity comes1151the absolute necessity of operating safe and reliable pipeline1152infrastructure to support dependable natural gas delivery to homes,1153businesses, and essential facilities like hospitals.1154    Every year the gas utility industry invests $33 billion on the1155safety of our pipeline systems. At CenterPoint Energy alone, we spend1156hundreds of millions of dollars every year to modernize our gas systems1157to enhance safety and reliability. For example, we will eliminate cast1158iron and bare steel from our system by the end of 2026 and will1159modernize our remaining low pressure systems by 2030. Unquestionably,1160pipeline safety is our industry's number one priority, and through1161critical partnerships with state and Federal regulators, legislators,1162and other stakeholders, CenterPoint Energy and other AGA member1163companies are continually working to enhance pipeline safety,1164integrity, and system resiliency.1165Pipeline Safety Reauthorization Priorities1166    AGA and its members support fact-based, reasonable, flexible, and1167practicable updates to pipeline safety regulation that build upon1168lessons learned and evolving improvements to pipeline safety and1169related programs and technology. In that spirit, AGA wishes to1170highlight 5 high-level priorities as the House-Senate reauthorization1171process moves forward.1172    Support Limiting Pipeline Excavation Damage Incidents. Across the1173gas utility industry, excavation damage is the primary cause of1174distribution pipeline incidents. From 2020-2024, CenterPoint Energy1175alone experienced nearly 46,000 damages from excavation activity. For1176approximately one third of these damages no locate was called in by the1177excavator. According to PHMSA data, in the past 20 years, excavation1178damage incidents on natural gas pipelines have resulted in 57 deaths,1179254 injuries, and over $300 million in property damage. These often1180tragic incidents are preventable. States that have strong excavation1181damage prevention and enforcement programs typically experience lower1182rates of damages to pipelines. AGA supports directing PHMSA to1183incentivize states to adopt One Call program leading practices, derived1184from the best state excavation damage programs, and condition their1185grants to State One Call programs based upon adoption of these best1186practices. Our company and our industry are confident this proposed1187program will reduce damages and save lives.1188    Support Pipeline Technology Alternatives. Modern pipeline safety1189technologies--not contemplated when many pipeline safety regulations1190were first implemented--can, if deployed, meet the intent of these1191older existing regulations and improve the overall safety of natural1192gas, hazardous liquid, underground storage, and liquefied natural gas1193infrastructure. For example, advanced pipeline leak detection1194technologies have advanced to the point where they can be used to1195comply with leak detection regulation. CenterPoint Energy began1196implementing advanced leak detection, which detects natural gas in the1197parts per billion range instead of the parts per million range of1198traditional leak detection technology, over a decade ago. With advanced1199leak detection,1200    CenterPoint Energy detects approximately 2.5 times as many leaks1201and repairs more leaks that would not have been detected using1202traditional leak detection technologies. Additionally, breakaway meter1203technologies and excess flow valves can stop the flow of gas if a meter1204is struck, eliminating the need for physical meter protection barriers.1205Industry supports a PHMSA-led process to identify technology1206alternatives that, if utilized, will meet the intent of existing1207pipeline safety regulations and provide an equal or greater level of1208pipeline safety.1209    Strengthen Criminal Penalties for Intentional Damage to Pipelines.1210CenterPoint Energy strongly supports strengthening criminal penalties1211for intentionally damaging pipeline infrastructure. Natural gas1212utilities are experiencing an increase in criminal attacks on their1213property, equipment and facilities. These activities range from1214gunshots targeting pipelines, Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs)1215placed on gas delivery equipment, and the damaging of facilities and1216equipment necessary for safe natural gas delivery. These activities not1217only are hazardous to the safety and property of the public and member1218company employees, but they also threaten an LDC's ability to deliver1219natural gas to thousands of homes, hospitals, schools, government and1220military facilities, and other critical infrastructure customers. AGA1221supports increased criminal penalties on bad actors who intentionally1222damage, destroy or impair pipelines and pipeline facilities, including1223those under construction.1224    Hydrogen-Natural Gas Blending R&D Study. Hydrogen is an emerging1225solution for achieving gas LDC energy storage and decarbonization1226goals. Natural gas projects in North America and worldwide demonstrate1227successful blending of hydrogen into the existing natural gas1228distribution network or utilizing natural gas that has a naturally1229occurring higher hydrogen content. Hawai'i Gas has successfully1230utilized a natural gas hydrogen blend of 15 percent for decades and1231many systems overseas are operating at approximately a 20 percent1232blend. It is important to understand how companies operating natural1233gas distribution systems with a higher hydrogen content are operating1234these systems safely. As such, we suggest the Government Accountability1235Office (GAO) conduct a review of natural gas distribution systems1236worldwide that utilize hydrogen-natural gas blending applications, or1237utilize gas with a higher hydrogen content, to identify processes,1238materials, and standards the operators have implemented to operate1239safely. The results of this study will help underpin the safety of1240ongoing domestic hydrogen R&D and blending operations.1241    Authorize a Pipeline Safety Voluntary Information-Sharing System.1242Congress should authorize a Voluntary Information-sharing System (VIS)1243based on the recommendations of the public advisory committee formed1244pursuant to the 2016 pipeline safety reauthorization law. A VIS will1245engage multiple stakeholders (e.g., government, industry, and pipeline1246safety NGOs) to collect and share best practices and lessons learned,1247promote improved pipeline safety, and will importantly include1248sufficient legal and regulatory safe harbors for information sharing to1249encourage industry participation. VIS will support industry's1250implementation of Pipeline Safety Management Systems by encouraging1251information sharing and facilitating understanding and management of1252pipeline safety risks.1253    5-Year Reauthorization for PHMSA's Pipeline Safety Program. PHMSA's1254Pipeline Safety program was reauthorized most recently in the PIPES Act1255of 2016 and PIPES Act of 2020. As PHMSA's Pipeline Safety program1256expired again in 2023, the frequency of reauthorization has been1257reduced to just 3 years. This interval is inadequate given the1258significant time it takes to conduct studies, publish reports, move1259reauthorization priorities from legislation to Proposed Rulemaking,1260address comments, and develop and publish Final Rules. Acknowledging1261the time required to conduct studies, publish reports, and develop1262feasible, reasonable, cost effective, and practical rulemaking1263(including stakeholder input), and in keeping with reauthorization1264intervals that preceded the PIPES Act of 2016 (1996, 2002, 2006, 2011),1265Congress should reauthorize PHMSA's Pipeline Safety program for not1266less than 5 years.1267Conclusion1268    America's gas utilities' commitment to pipeline safety relies on1269sound engineering principles and best in class technology, a trained1270professional workforce, effective community relationships, and a strong1271partnership with state pipeline safety authorities and PHMSA. As1272pipeline safety reauthorization legislation is drafted this year,1273CenterPoint Energy, and our partners at the American Gas Association,1274encourage Congress to work in a bipartisan fashion to advance1275reasonable and consensus changes to pipeline safety law and regulation,1276support PHMSA's primary role as pipeline safety regulator, and1277recognize the great strides in pipeline safety engineering and1278operating practices that pipeline companies are putting into practice1279across the country. We stand ready to assist in this process with real1280world operations, engineering and safety data and experience. Please1281use us as a resource.12821283    Senator Young. Thanks so much, Mr. Leger.1284    Mr. Caram, you are recognized for five minutes.12851286 STATEMENT OF BILL CARAM, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PIPELINE SAFETY1287                             TRUST12881289    Mr. Caram. Thank you.1290    Good morning, Chair Young, Ranking Member Peters, and1291members of the Subcommittee.1292    I am Bill Caram, Executive Director of the Pipeline Safety1293Trust, which was created after the 1999 Olympic pipeline1294tragedy in Bellingham, Washington, that killed three boys.1295    We serve as an independent national watchdog over the1296pipeline industry and its regulators. On average, a significant1297pipeline incident occurs every 32 hours in America, nearly one1298every day.1299    Since this subcommittee's last Markup in July 2019, 671300people have been killed and 182 hospitalized from pipeline1301incidents. That is 67 families forever changed and 182 lives1302altered, many permanently.1303    The past two years have been the deadliest in nearly 151304with 30 deaths, including a 5-year-old in Missouri, a 15-year-1305old in Utah, and an 82-year-old pastor's wife in Mississippi.1306    Our shared goal of zero incidents feels unreachable when we1307have not yet been able to prevent these tragic deaths. Making a1308meaningful difference on pipeline safety will require three1309essential and interconnected elements: improved regulations,1310effective enforcement, and widespread adoption of pipeline1311safety management systems, or PSMS.1312    In many cases Congress has hamstrung PHMSA from developing1313effective regulations. Provisions in the pipeline safety1314statute like the extra burdensome cost-benefit requirement make1315it extremely difficult for PHMSA to develop lifesaving1316regulations.1317    Also, the nonapplication clause, which permanently exempts1318approximately half our Nation's transmission pipelines1319including some at the highest risk for meeting some modern1320safety standards.1321    There certainly are operators leading the way on safety,1322but this is not universal. We need regulations that allow1323flexibility for innovation while ensuring the product stays in1324the pipelines of all operators.1325    I have included practical, common sense ideas for improving1326regulations that would make a real difference on safety in my1327written testimony such as fire shut-off valves.1328    These simple devices automatically close when exposed to1329heat, preventing gas from fueling house fires. They are1330inexpensive, require no ongoing maintenance, and can be easily1331installed on service lines.1332    As recently recommended by the NTSB, natural gas alarms or1333methane detectors if installed in homes and businesses with or1334near gas service would undoubtedly save lives.1335    We need modernized regulations for carbon dioxide and1336hydrogen blended pipelines. Congress has incentivized this1337infrastructure without identifying--without addressing the1338regulatory and research gaps that put communities on the front1339lines of significant safety risks.1340    This year marks 5 years since the Denbury carbon dioxide1341failure in Satartia, Mississippi that sent nearly 50 people to1342the hospital. That harrowing night laid bare many of the risks1343and regulatory shortfalls with these pipelines.1344    Increasing authorized resources to PHMSA is also necessary.1345Not only has the agency been chronically underfunded but the1346additional miles of jurisdictional pipe and the potential build1347out of carbon dioxide and hydrogen pipelines demand an increase1348in resources from Congress both to the agency and, just as1349significantly, to the state programs.1350    Even the best regulations, however, can be meaningless1351without robust enforcement. When we try to chart penalties1352levied on operators against their quarterly earnings after1353tragic incidents we often cannot even visualize the penalty, it1354is such a tiny percentage of earnings even when PHMSA is fully1355using its enforcement authority.1356    Recently, PHMSA's enforcement shows a concerning trend.1357Enforcement case initiations have declined by as much as 901358percent compared to historical averages across multiple prior1359administrations.1360    Meanwhile, incident rates remain relatively consistent.1361This enforcement gap warrants the Subcommittee's attention.1362    According to a recent PHMSA report to Congress on the1363adoption of pipeline safety management systems, or PSMS, among1364gas distribution operators, while most pipeline mileage is1365owned by operators committed to PSMS only half of all operators1366have made this commitment.1367    To improve safety we need widespread industry adoption--all1368systems, all operators, large and small. This subcommittee has1369an opportunity to save lives and make a meaningful difference1370on pipeline safety by streamlining rule development, making1371enforcement more effective, and driving adoption of PSMS.1372    As you discuss how to move forward on authorizing PHMSA's1373pipeline safety program and make improvements to the law, I1374implore you to think of the empty seats at dinner tables across1375the country because of pipeline failures.1376    Thirty dinner tables are missing someone from the last two1377years alone. I have been with families who have lost loved ones1378recently and some 25 years ago, and I can assure you the pain1379never goes away.1380    Please ensure PHMSA meets its responsibility to the1381American people. Thank you.1382    [The prepared statement of Mr. Caram follows:]13831384         Prepared Statement of Bill Caram, Executive Director,1385                         Pipeline Safety Trust1386    Good morning, Committee Chair Cruz, Subcommittee Chair Young,1387Committee Ranking Member Cantwell, Subcommittee Ranking Member Peters,1388and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to speak1389today on the vital subject of pipeline safety. My name is Bill Caram,1390and I am the Executive Director of the Pipeline Safety Trust.1391    The Pipeline Safety Trust was created after the Olympic Pipe Line1392tragedy in Bellingham, Washington in 1999. That entirely preventable1393failure spilled nearly a quarter-million gallons of gasoline into a1394beautiful salmon stream in the heart of our community which eventually1395ignited and killed three boys. The U.S. Justice Department was so1396appalled at the operations of the pipeline company and equally appalled1397at the lax oversight from the Federal government, that they asked the1398Federal courts to set aside money from the settlement to create the1399Pipeline Safety Trust as an independent national watchdog organization1400over the pipeline industry and its regulators.1401    We work to ensure that no other community must endure the senseless1402grief that Bellingham has had to experience from a pipeline tragedy.1403Sadly, there have been many senseless pipeline tragedies and disasters1404since Bellingham. I am here today, hoping that we can continue to work1405together to help move towards our shared goal of zero incidents.1406Recent Pipeline Failures1407    Since this subcommittee held its markup of the last authorization1408of PHMSA's pipeline safety program on July 31, 2019, 67 people have1409been killed, and 182 people have been injured to the point of in-1410patient hospitalization. There have been over 3,000 reportable1411incidents, with nearly 1,600 of those deemed ``significant'' by PHMSA1412standards. That means there has been a significant incident nearly1413every day (a significant incident every 1.33 days, on average) and1414nearly four people killed or seriously injured every month over the1415last six years.1416    In fact, the past two years have been the deadliest for pipelines1417in nearly 15 years--surpassed only by the two-year period that included1418the devastating PG&E explosion in San Bruno, California, which killed1419eight people and destroyed an entire neighborhood--a time that I think1420all of today's witnesses would agree was a low point for pipeline1421safety. We continue to languish with consistently poor performance,1422with a significant incident almost every day and 30 people killed over1423the last two years.1424    A look at the National Transportation Safety Board's docket will1425give a glimpse into the current state of pipeline safety. The NTSB has1426eight open investigations, from a million-gallon oil spill off the1427coast of Mississippi, to a host of pipeline-caused explosions in1428Jackson, MS, Youngstown, OH, Bel Air, MD, South Jordan, UT, Avondale,1429LA, Hutchinson, KS, and most recently, Lexington, MO. The NTSB1430investigators, sadly, have their hands full.1431    In December, the NTSB held a Board meeting to discuss the 2023 UGI1432Utilities pipeline failure in West Reading, PA that resulted in an1433explosion that killed seven people and injured 11.\1\ Family members of1434the victims attended the meeting where the NTSB discussed the failed1435piece of pipeline infrastructure made from Aldyl A plastic. PHMSA has1436known these Aldyl A components are prone to failure for decades.1437---------------------------------------------------------------------------1438    \1\ Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd., UGI Corporation Natural Gas-Fueled1439Explosion and Fire https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/1440PLD23LR002.aspx.1441---------------------------------------------------------------------------1442    The NTSB is also investigating an Enbridge pipeline failure that1443occurred in November 2024 in South Jordan, UT that killed a 15-year-old1444child. The preliminary report finds that the failed pipeline was also1445Aldyl A.\2\1446---------------------------------------------------------------------------1447    \2\ Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd., Enbridge Inc. Natural Gas-Fueled Home1448Explosion https://www1449.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/PLD25FR001.aspx.1450---------------------------------------------------------------------------1451    Just last year, in Jackson, MS, pipelines operated by Atmos Energy1452appears to have fueled two home explosions, one of which killed the 81-1453year-old wife of a community pastor. An NTSB preliminary report1454describes what appears to an under-maintained system full of leaks.1455Neighbors had complained repeatedly about the smell of gas. Atmos1456didn't find any leaks it deemed to be hazardous before the home1457exploded.\3\1458---------------------------------------------------------------------------1459    \3\ Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd., Atmos Energy Corporation Natural Gas-1460Fueled Home Explosions and Fires (Feb. 14, 2024) https://www.ntsb.gov/1461investigations/Pages/PLD24FR003.aspx.1462---------------------------------------------------------------------------1463    On the hazardous liquids side, we've seen two recent failures that1464have contaminated drinking water wells, and another incident on a1465chronically failing system. An Energy Transfer pipeline in Pennsylvania1466was discovered to have been leaking jet fuel. Evidence suggests this1467pipeline may have been leaking for at least 16 months, possibly much1468longer, after many complaints about the taste and smell of residents'1469water. And in December, an Enterprise Products pipeline spilled 23,0001470gallons of gasoline, contaminating nine drinking wells. And just last1471month, the Keystone Pipeline failed yet again, this time spilling about1472110,000 gallons of crude oil in North Dakota.1473    This is just a selection of the approximately 1,500 significant1474pipeline incidents that have happened in the last six years.14755 Year Anniversary of the Denbury Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Failure in1476        Satartia, MS1477    I want to take a moment to acknowledge the five-year anniversary of1478the harrowing carbon dioxide pipeline failure in Satartia, MS. Five1479years have passed since nearly 50 people went to the hospital1480experiencing seizures, loss of consciousness, foaming at the mouth, and1481many other terrifying effects of carbon dioxide exposure.\4\ Denbury's1482failure in Satartia laid bare many glaring regulatory shortfalls that1483have been clearly identified, but five years later we haven't1484modernized the regulations. It took over 12 years for PHMSA to1485modernize regulations with lessons learned from PG&E's devastation in1486San Bruno. I hope it doesn't take nearly as long for PHMSA to modernize1487carbon dioxide pipeline safety regulations with lessons learned from1488Denbury's disaster.1489---------------------------------------------------------------------------1490    \4\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety1491Admin, Failure Investigation Report--Denbury Gulf Coast Pipelines,1492LLC--Pipeline Rupture/Natural Force Damage (May 26, 2022) https://1493www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2022-05/1494Failure%20Investigation1495%20Report%20-%20Denbury%20Gulf%20Coast%20Pipeline.pdf.1496---------------------------------------------------------------------------1497Congressional Oversight1498    The Pipeline Safety Trust urges Congress to fulfill its oversight1499responsibilities regarding PHMSA by requesting information about the1500status of staff reductions. We have heard very little official news1501from PHMSA about how many staff members have accepted retirement offers1502or been terminated. We have heard from news sources about the high1503level of turnover at the senior leadership level, which, if true,1504represents an enormous drain of knowledge and experience from the1505agency. We haven't heard anything about the losses from elsewhere1506within the agency. Full staff levels at a small safety agency such as1507PHMSA are essential to meet its responsibilities to the public.1508    Also, we encourage PHMSA to seek answers from PHMSA to explain the1509sudden drop in enforcement case initiations under the first few months1510of new leadership. The number of cases posted to PHMSA's Enforcement1511Transparency website\5\ represents as much as a 90 percent drop in the1512number of cases initiated within the first months of previous1513administrations, regardless of party.1514---------------------------------------------------------------------------1515    \5\ U.S. Dep't of Transp, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety1516Admin., Summary of Enforcement Activity: Nationwide (May 1, 2025)1517https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/summaries.1518---------------------------------------------------------------------------1519    We firmly believe, and expect wide agreement among stakeholders,1520that pipeline safety is a bipartisan issue that we can all support.1521Legislative Priorities to Improve Pipeline Safety1522    While everyone on today's panel supports the goal of zero1523incidents, unfortunately, we have a long way to go. I commend this1524subcommittee for working on pipeline safety legislation.1525    The Pipeline Safety Trust believes that making a meaningful1526difference on pipeline safety involves three components: improved1527safety regulations, financially meaningful enforcement, and widespread1528adoption of Pipeline Safety Management Systems (PSMS). Congress can1529play a key role in each of these efforts.1530    Critical to each of these is the existence of a strong regulator,1531both in PHMSA and each of the state programs. Not only has the agency1532been chronically underfunded, Congress has also hamstrung PHMSA with1533statutory restrictions such as the extra burdensome cost-benefit1534requirement, of which PHMSA is the only safety agency laden with this1535onerous and overly restrictive obligation. Also, the non-application1536clause, forbidding PHMSA from applying certain standards from existing1537pipelines also prevents the agency from being as strong a regulator as1538necessary to ensure safe communities and a healthy environment.1539    For many of the legislative priorities described, there is a fact1540sheet with recommended legislative language included in the Appendix.1541PHMSA Funding and State Programs1542    Beyond revoking these two restrictive provisions, Congress can1543empower PHMSA to be a stronger regulator by giving it the resources it1544needs, which involves a substantial increase in funding. PHMSA has had1545large increases in Congressional mandates without a corresponding1546increase in funding. For example, nearly 100,000 miles of gas gathering1547lines have finally come under PHMSA regulations and another1548approximately 300,000 miles are under new reporting requirements. Also1549on the horizon is a new generation of pipelines carrying carbon dioxide1550and hydrogen, requiring new expertise and personnel. State programs,1551responsible for oversight of more than 80 percent of the Nation's1552pipeline mileage, are also feeling the squeeze on their capacity.1553    Because of the lack of resources, PHMSA has been reliant on the1554industry it is tasked to regulate for technical expertise on1555rulemaking. A 2015 Politico investigation\6\ found that PHMSA is an1556agency ``that lacks the manpower to inspect the nation's . . . oil and1557gas lines, that grants the industry it regulates significant power to1558influence the rule-making process, and that has stubbornly failed to1559take a more aggressive regulatory role, even when ordered by Congress1560to do so.'' PHMSA has also long had difficulty in attracting and1561retaining experienced personnel as the industry often hires staff away1562at higher salaries.1563---------------------------------------------------------------------------1564    \6\ Andrew Restuccia & Elana Schor, Pipelines Blow up and People1565Die, POLITICO (Apr. 21, 2015) https://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/1566the-little-pipeline-agency-that-couldnt-217227.1567---------------------------------------------------------------------------1568    Currently, state utility commissions and state pipeline inspectors1569have the ability to take over direct safety authority and oversight of1570gas pipelines from PHMSA. State programs can be reimbursed by PHMSA for1571up to 80 percent of their spending. However, in recent years, no state1572has been reimbursed at the maximum level. In 2023, the National1573Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) wrote a1574letter\7\ to Congress requesting sufficient funding for PHMSA to be1575able to reimburse state safety grants at the 80 percent rate. PST1576agrees that state inspection programs in good standing with PHMSA1577should be granted 80 percent of their expenditures. Thus, Congress1578should appropriate PHMSA with enough funding to accomplish this.1579---------------------------------------------------------------------------1580    \7\ Letter from Greg White on behalf of the National Association of1581Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) to House Transportation and1582Infrastructure Committee (Sept. 18, 2023) (regarding pipeline safety/1583PHMSA reauthorization legislation.1584---------------------------------------------------------------------------1585    The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's PIPES1586Act of 2023\8\ proposed a funding increase of about 10 percent. PST1587would like to see PHMSA's budget be increased by at least 30 percent.1588This recommendation is based on factors such as inflation, PHMSA's1589increased authority for regulating new types of pipelines, and PHMSA's1590historic underfunding. Inflation has increased costs 23 percent since1591PHMSA was last authorized in December 2020.\9\ Accounting for1592inflation, a 10 percent increase would not even be equivalent to1593PHMSA's previous funding levels and would in fact place PHMSA even more1594behind.1595---------------------------------------------------------------------------1596    \8\ Promoting Innovation in Pipeline Efficiency and Safety Act of15972023 (PIPES Act of 2023), H.R. 6494, 118th Cong. (2023) https://1598www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6494/1599text?s=2&r=1&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22pipes+2024%22%7D.1600    \9\ U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index Inflation1601Calculator https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm1602(calculating the rate of inflation from December 2020 to March 2025).1603---------------------------------------------------------------------------1604Rupture Mitigation Valves1605    Because of the statutory limitations described above, PHMSA's1606improved regulations on rupture mitigation valves do not apply to1607existing pipelines, including on older pipes in areas that could affect1608densely populated or ecologically sensitive areas. Arguably these are1609the pipelines that need this technology the most.1610    In 2022, PHMSA revised its pipeline safety regulations to require1611rupture mitigation valves (RMVs), or alternative equivalent1612technologies, to newly constructed or entirely replaced onshore gas1613transmission, Type A gas gathering, and hazardous liquid pipelines with1614diameters of 6 inches or greater.\10\ The rule did not, however,1615require operators to retrofit older pipes because of the nonapplication1616clause found at 49 U.S.C. Sec. 60104(b), which prohibits PHMSA from1617promulgating regulations to existing facilities. Because of this, PHMSA1618fell short of adequately implementing the NTSB's recommendations made1619after the San Bruno tragedy.\11\1620---------------------------------------------------------------------------1621    \10\ Pipeline Safety: Requirement of Valve Installation and Minimum1622Rupture Detection Standards, 87 Fed. Reg. 20,940-992 (Apr. 8, 2022).1623    \11\ Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd., Press Release: NTSB Issues Response1624to PHMSA's Valve and Rupture Detection Rule, (Apr. 1, 2022) https://1625www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR202162620401B.aspx.1627---------------------------------------------------------------------------1628    Excluding certain pipelines from implementation of critical safety1629technology based on age is dangerous. Older pipes are likely more prone1630to failure, and it is arbitrary to require critical safety technology1631on some but not all pipelines. Requiring operator to retrofit older1632pipelines with RMVs in high consequence areas (HCAs) would protect1633areas with more people and buildings that could be affected by a1634failure. 49 C.F.R. Sec. 192.903. Because of the nonapplication clause,1635however, Congress must draft self-executing language for PHMSA to have1636the authority to promulgate these regulations.1637Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Safety1638    PHMSA regulations for CO2 pipelines lack the detail1639necessary to ensure the safe operation of these pipelines. Given the1640Congressional incentives driving carbon capture and sequestration1641investment, many experts expect a large increase in the mileage of the1642Nation's carbon dioxide pipelines. Once relatively rare and remote,1643these pipelines could soon be much closer to people and communities.1644The Denbury CO2 pipeline failure in Satartia, MS1645demonstrated the unique safety risks that these pipelines pose. An1646asphyxiant that is heavier than air, CO2 can move as a plume1647in a dangerous and even lethal concentration close to the ground for1648long distances after a failure. Current PHMSA safety regulations are1649inappropriate and insufficient, as described in a Pipeline Safety Trust1650report.\12\1651---------------------------------------------------------------------------1652    \12\ Richard B. Kuprewicz, Accufacts' Perspectives on the State of1653Federal Carbon Dioxide Transmission Pipeline Safety Regulations as it1654Relates to Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Sequestration within the1655U.S. (Mar. 23, 2022) available at https://pstrust.org/wp-content/1656uploads/2022/03/3-23-22-Final-Accufacts-CO2-Pipeline-1657Report2.pdf.1658---------------------------------------------------------------------------1659    In early 2025, PHMSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for1660CO2 pipelines. PST supported the NPRM, as it contained1661provisions that would have drastically improved CO2 pipeline1662safety but believed there was still room for improvement.1663Unfortunately, on January 23, 2025, the NPRM was withdrawn as part of1664the Trump administration's ``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review''1665Executive Order.\13\1666---------------------------------------------------------------------------1667    \13\ Exec. Order, Regulatory Freeze Pending Review (Jan. 20, 2025)1668https://www.whitehouse.gov presidential-actions/2025/01/regulatory-1669freeze-pending-review/.1670---------------------------------------------------------------------------1671    Congress should require PHMSA to re-issue its notice of proposed1672rulemaking on CO2 pipelines, accept public comment, and1673finalize the rule within the next eighteen months.1674Hydrogen Blending Pipeline Safety1675    Hydrogen has been highly incentivized in recent legislation such as1676the Production Tax Credit in the Inflation Reduction Act. Gas1677distribution operators are considering blending hydrogen into existing1678gas distribution infrastructure and the trade group the American Gas1679Association includes hydrogen blends of 20 percent as a key component1680of their Net Zero plan for the industry. However, hydrogen1681transportation by pipeline poses many safety risks and key knowledge1682gaps remain. The risks run highest when the pipelines are near people.1683At least one operator has blended hydrogen, however that system in1684Hawaii is unique enough that it cannot serve as a model for the rest of1685the country.1686    Hydrogen has a much higher flammability range than methane and is1687known to embrittle certain types of steel and plastic pipelines. A1688report on blending hydrogen commissioned by the California Public1689Utility Commission from University of California Riverside found an1690alarming number of safety risks and knowledge gaps. A report by1691Accufacts commissioned by the Pipeline Safety Trust stated that the1692weakest safety link for hydrogen blends in the distribution system were1693the pipes inside residences.1694    Congress should not allow hydrogen blends into gas distribution1695systems until the National Academy of Sciences has issued a report on1696the safety risks and knowledge gaps and PHMSA has updated its1697regulations.1698In-Home Methane Detectors1699    Although pipeline operators may discover or be alerted to leaks1700through various activities, such as maintenance or odor complaints,1701these strategies will not consistently locate all hazardous leaks. When1702natural gas migrates through the soil into a home, the odorant may be1703stripped from the gas, and the resident would not be aware of the need1704to evacuate and alert the pipeline operator. In-home methane detectors1705are one method of continuous monitoring that can help the public and1706pipeline operators identify leaks and improve public safety. 2023 and17072024 was the deadliest two-year period for pipelines in over a1708decade,\14\ with much of those fatalities from building explosions that1709could have benefited from in-home methane detection.1710---------------------------------------------------------------------------1711    \14\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety1712Admin., Serious Incidents 20 Year Trends https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/1713analytics/saw.dll?Portalpages&PortalPath=%21714Fshared%2FPDM%20Public%20Website52F_portal%2FSC%20Incident%20Trend&Page=1715Serious.1716---------------------------------------------------------------------------1717    The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has recommended the1718use of in-home methane detectors,\15\ sometimes also referred to as1719natural gas detectors, to alert the public of dangerous gas leaks and1720prevent home explosions. Methane detectors are similar to smoke and1721carbon monoxide detectors in that they are easy to install and1722relatively inexpensive. Where they differ is that they can detect a gas1723leak well before it ignites, preventing a potentially catastrophic1724explosion. Multiple NTSB investigations of home explosions have1725determined that the presence of an in-home methane detector could have1726helped mitigate the consequences.1727---------------------------------------------------------------------------1728    \15\ Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd., Improve Pipeline Leak Detection and1729Mitigation (Dec. 22, 2022) https://www.ntsb.gov/Advocacy/mwl/Pages/mwl-173021-22/mwl-rph-01.aspx.1731---------------------------------------------------------------------------1732    Congress should mandate the installation of in-home methane1733detectors in all residential and commercial occupancies receiving gas1734service.1735Fire Shutoff Valves1736    In the event of a fire in a structure that has natural gas service,1737gas distribution piping is often compromised and serves as fuel. This1738adds literal fuel to the fire and puts occupants and first responders1739at increased risk of injury and death. According to PHMSA, for this1740reason, it is necessary to quickly shut off the flow of gas to the1741structure.1742    It may take considerable time to complete the shutoff of gas,1743including notification of first responders and the gas company, arrival1744of first responders and gas company at the scene, determining the1745appropriate method to shut off the gas, executing shut off, and release1746of the gas in the pipe between the shutoff location and the structure.1747Reviews of accident reports have shown that it is not unusual for this1748to take hours, prolonging the emergency. Use of automated shutoff1749valves can significantly reduce the time to shut off gas to the1750structure. One such device is a fire shutoff valve (FSV), also known as1751a thermal shutoff valve.1752    A typical FSV uses a spring-loaded plug held in place by a fusible1753link made of a low melting point alloy. When the fire shutoff valve is1754exposed to fire, the link melts and the spring closes the valve,1755shutting off the gas. FSVs are typically installed in the service line1756either before the regulator, before the meter, or after the meter.1757    FSVs are commercially available and have been used in gas service1758lines before the gas meter and in gas supplies to appliances.1759Currently, there are no Federal regulations requiring their use in1760natural gas distribution systems. They are required in1761Massachusetts\16\ and have been used in Germany since the 1990s. The1762Pipeline Safety Trust supports the widespread use of these safety1763devices and advocates for Federal regulations that would make their use1764mandatory.1765---------------------------------------------------------------------------1766    \16\ General Laws of Massachusetts Part 1, Title XXII, Chapter 164,1767Section 75 A.1768---------------------------------------------------------------------------1769    Congress should require PHMSA to amend 49 CFR Part 192(H) to1770require operators to install fire shutoff valves on all gas1771distribution service lines. Alternatively, congress could require PHMSA1772to amend 49 CFR 192.1007(b) to identify fires as a threat to their1773distribution system.1774Financially Meaningful Enforcement1775    With few exceptions, civil penalties are not financially meaningful1776to operators. When we try to chart penalties levied on operators1777because of fatal pipeline failures against their quarterly earnings, we1778often can't even visualize the penalty since it's such a tiny1779percentage of earnings. Giving PHMSA more enforcement authority is1780critical tom improving pipeline safety.1781Pipeline Safety Management Systems1782    Pipeline Safety Management Systems (PSMS) have been developed over1783the last ten years. Lessons have been incorporated and updated. When1784implemented properly it leads to better safety outcomes. However1785widespread adoption still eludes the pipeline industry.1786    PHMSA recently released its required report to Congress on the1787progress of the gas distribution pipeline industry towards adoption of1788PSMS. While progress has been made on total mileage of pipelines that1789are under control of an operator that has made a commitment to PSMS,1790only about half of the distribution operators have made that1791commitment. PHMSA also recently released an Advisory Bulletin1792encouraging the voluntary adoption of PSMS by the pipeline industry.1793    Congress could make a meaningful difference in pipeline safety by1794directing PHMSA to take steps towards widespread industry adoption1795beyond voluntary efforts.1796Conclusion1797    As you discuss how to move forward on authorizing PHMSA's pipeline1798safety program and make improvements to the law, I implore you to think1799of the empty seats at dinner tables across the country because of1800pipeline failures. I've been with families who have lost their loved1801ones recently and some who lost their loved ones 25 years ago. I can1802tell you; the pain never goes away. Please give PHMSA the authority and1803the resources it needs to meet its responsibility to the American1804people.1805    Thank you.1806                                 ______18071808[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]18091810    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Caram.1811    I will now recognize Senator Cruz, the Full Committee1812Chairman, for his opening statement.18131814                  STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,1815                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS18161817    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it.1818    Americans have been abundantly clear that they want1819cheaper, reliable, and safe energy. That is what we are here1820today to discuss, what Federal policies would ensure that1821energy America needs is affordable, reliable, and safe.1822    The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,1823or PHMSA, is the agency within the Department of Transportation1824responsible for overseeing pipeline safety.1825    This is no small task with over 3 million miles of oil,1826natural gas, and other hazardous liquid pipelines all across1827this Nation.1828    Good Federal policy would ensure that pipeline operators1829have a clear understanding of the safety requirements. Federal1830regulations are based on data and address risk appropriately,1831and the regulations are cost effective.1832    So what was the previous administration's policy on1833pipeline safety? One maxim of politics is that personnel is1834policy. If that is the case then the Biden administration did1835not give a damn about pipeline safety because they did not1836nominate anyone to be the PHMSA Administrator.1837    That is right. It is not that they nominated someone and1838then withdrew that person. They simply never bothered to1839nominate any human being to lead the pipeline safety agency.1840    Instead, they relied on a Deputy Administrator for the1841entire four years, a position that is not confirmed by the U.S.1842Senate. That was a shameful dereliction of duty.1843    Unfortunately, in that entire time this committee never1844held a single hearing on pipeline safety for those entire four1845years, denying us any opportunity for oversight.1846    So there was nobody nominated by the President in the1847position, nobody confirmed by the Senate in the position, and1848this committee held zero hearings on pipeline safety. That1849gives you an indication of what priority they put on this1850topic.1851    President Trump has corrected this error by nominating Paul1852Roberti to lead PHMSA. I hope to hold a hearing on his1853nomination very soon.1854    The unaccountable Biden PHMSA also attempted to remake the1855pipeline safety agency into a climate change agency because1856every agency in the Federal Government under Biden was a1857climate change agency instead of doing what its damn purpose1858was. Not only duplicating the work of other agencies, but1859disregarding the explicit statutory language that Congress1860carefully negotiated.1861    One egregious example of the Biden PHMSA's overreach is the1862natural gas leak detection and repair rule in which PHMSA1863included the regulation of underground natural gas storage and1864liquefied natural gas facilities despite the statute explicitly1865not including those among the list of facilities to be1866addressed by that rulemaking.1867    It is notable that more actions finalized during the Biden1868PHMSA were overturned by a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals than1869any other administration since Congress created the agency in18702004.1871    Listen to that again. Twenty-one years ago Congress created1872that agency. The last 4 years under President Biden they had1873more of their actions overturned by a Federal court of appeals1874than any administration in history.1875    I suppose that is not surprising, given that they did not1876have anyone named to run the agency and they did not have the1877Senate engaged in oversight on them. Fortunately, President1878Trump stopped the leak detection rule before it could be1879promulgated.1880    This Congress we have the opportunity to debate and to pass1881a pipeline safety reauthorization. Today's hearing is designed1882to help inform that discussion.1883    One topic I expect to hear from the witnesses is the threat1884to pipeline safety from ecoterrorists. Though the current1885statute has penalties against individuals, quote, ``damaging or1886destroying an operational pipeline'' it does not expressly1887address ecoterrorists who tamper with pipelines or damage1888pipelines under construction.1889    The unauthorized turning of pipeline valves is a major1890safety concern that threatens the very environment that the1891ecoterrorists claim they are trying to protect.1892    Pipeline operators have been forced to shut down their1893lines in response to threats from ecoterrorists. I am proud to1894co-sponsor Senator Sheehy's ``Safe and Secure Transportation of1895Energy Act'', which would close this gap in statute by adding,1896quote, ``vandalizing, tampering with, disrupting the operation1897or construction of, or preventing the operation or construction1898of a pipeline'' to the list of actions for which penalties1899could be applied.1900    I also want to hear from the witnesses about ways that1901pipeline operators are seeking to improve the safe operation of1902their pipelines but for which outdated or misguided regulations1903are currently barriers to greater safety.1904    I look forward to the witnesses' testimony and their1905response to questions.1906    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1907    Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Cruz, for that1908opening statement.1909    We will now move to member questions and I will begin with1910Mr. Leger.1911    As I mentioned in my opening statement, I am interested in1912using this PHMSA reauthorization to modernize our pipeline1913safety laws and to seize on opportunities that would allow1914industry to deploy innovative technologies to enhance safety1915within the broader ecosystem.1916    Mr. Leger, can you provide an example of a promising safety1917technology and what legislative changes might be needed to1918promote further adoption of this technology or new technologies1919in general?1920    Mr. Leger. Absolutely, Senator Young. Thank you for the1921question.1922    At CenterPoint Energy we have certainly embraced new1923technology as well as our other member companies that are1924associated with AGA. Have a couple of things that we work on.1925    Number one, one of the things that I am really most proud1926of that would certainly be helpful to have PHMSA weigh in on is1927we are currently deploying advanced metering technology, and1928that is a first in the industry and we plan to install the one1929millionth meter of that this year. Over a seven-year period we1930plan to replace every single one of our meters on our system1931with this advanced meter technology.1932    So one of the things that this does it directly affects1933what you were talking about is the safe operation of our1934system.1935    So the meter that we are working with has a couple of1936sensors on the inside. One is a heat sensor, and if there is a1937fire on the inside of the house and the building log gets to a1938certain temperature it will automatically shut that meter off.1939    Additionally, there is a flow sensor in there and when it1940gains flow that is excessive of what is normal through that1941meter it will automatically shut that meter off, thereby1942providing safety features for the homeowner.1943    Senator Young. And so those are solutions. Clearly, as you1944have articulated, they are designed to enhance safety and1945sufficient incentive already exists it seems for your1946adoption--your deployment of those technologies.1947    Are there any changes either to regulation or to our1948statutes that pertain to pipeline safety that you or, perhaps,1949other members think might be appropriate to enable adoption of1950those technologies or similar technologies?1951    Mr. Leger. I would say that legislation or rulemaking at1952the Federal level that allows new technologies to be approved--1953the streamlined process approved at the PHMSA level only helps1954us at the local level to get them approved and I will give you1955a for instance.1956    Anytime we bring on a new technology, if it is not already1957approved by PHMSA then I need to go to each and every state1958that I operate in and then individually get them approved. So1959it is efficiency.1960    Senator Young. OK. Mr. Black.1961    Mr. Black. In the 2020 PIPES Act Congress authorized a1962technology pilot demonstration program for pipeline operators1963to show to PHMSA how new technologies should be reflected in1964pipeline repair criteria regulations, right.1965    Pipelines are inspected from the inside--in line1966inspection, so-called smart pigs traveling inside the1967pipeline----1968    Senator Young. Right. Right.1969    Mr. Black.--collecting all that information. The pilot1970program authorized by Congress was time limited. PHMSA ruined1971it.1972    PHMSA required it to go through the special permit process1973in the last administration and they were going to apply NEPA1974reviews to what is an R&D project. We need Congress to1975reauthorize that and to tell PHMSA not to do that so that we1976can show PHMSA how to benefit.1977    Senator Young. This is--yes, this is a systemic issue1978within the Federal Government. We do pilot programs all the1979time. We defund the pilot programs before they play it out.1980    Sometimes we allow pilot programs to occur without a study1981to analyze how they have done. When there is a study and we1982have a very successful pilot program we never scale.1983    I mean, who runs an organization like this? Well, it is a1984rhetorical question.1985    So, Mr. Rorick, do you have anything to add?1986    Mr. Rorick. Yes. I think that there are many improvements1987that can be made to existing regulations where we take a risk-1988based approach that allow us to use the latest technology.1989    Mr. Black and Mr. Leger talked about some of those1990technologies, not only on pipelines. There also exists a lot of1991technologies that we can use--drones, robotics--on tanks as1992well.1993    You mentioned, Senator, the use of AI. There are huge1994opportunities to use AI and industry is exploring the1995opportunities to use AI for data management and then also use1996AI to help us to look at that data and then preemptively1997address issues.1998    So we just need to free up the process to let us use these1999technologies.2000    Senator Young. Great. Very briefly, anything to add, Mr.2001Caram, on this topic? It is OK if not.2002    Mr. Caram. Very briefly. I will just say, you know,2003obviously, we support technological innovation to improve2004safety.2005    We understand the importance of having a good process in2006place if you are going to allow operators to not follow the2007current minimum safety regulations. There needs to be a robust2008process to make sure that technology is safe.2009    Senator Young. One very pointed point of clarification or,2010perhaps, education for me, Mr. Leger, did you say cast iron2011belch?2012    Mr. Leger. I am sorry. Cast iron and bare steel.2013    Senator Young. And bare steel?2014    Mr. Leger. Yes, sir.2015    Senator Young. OK. All right. And so we have pipes that are2016not in the latest--they do not have the appropriate form of2017steel or the most modern and resilient steel. Unpack this for2018me----2019    Mr. Leger. Yes, sir. We----2020    Senator Young.--as someone who does not make steel for a2021living.2022    Mr. Leger. Absolutely. So bare steel and cast iron are both2023pipes that have been in the ground for 60, 80, sometimes 1002024years, and we have eliminated the vast majority of that in our2025system and will have it out in 2026.2026    Senator Young. Why do we need to eliminate it?2027    Mr. Leger. Because it is not the safest and most modern2028technology that is available right now, and so we are putting2029that in with high-density plastic and plastic and then also2030steel--properly coated steel.2031    Senator Young. Well, we may have to follow up on that. I am2032told they make some steel in the state of Indiana.2033    Mr. Peters.2034    Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2035    You know, currently state utility commissions and state2036pipeline inspectors oversee, roughly, 85 percent of the2037Nation's pipeline infrastructure.2038    This Federal-state partnership is critical as our state2039inspectors are usually intimately familiar with the local2040pipeline operations and their work can lead to often more2041thorough and frequent inspections than PHMSA could possibly do2042by themselves.2043    So to our industry panelists--Mr. Black, Mr. Leger, and Mr.2044Rorick--as the industry works toward zero incidents can you2045speak to the important role that state agencies play in working2046with you to keep the pipeline system safe and operational?2047    We will start with Mr. Black.2048    Mr. Black. Thank you, Senator.2049    Two things come to mind on states. One, states maintain2050excavation damage programs where we are trying to protect2051underground pipelines and other utility infrastructure from2052damage.2053    Those programs are weak if there are exemptions to parties2054that do not have to participate in the one call program or if2055those programs are inaccurately enforced.2056    There is legislation that was introduced in a committee in2057the House last year that puts the right pressure on states to2058improve their excavation damage programs and we call that to2059your attention.2060    Second, as you mentioned, sometimes states are approved by2061PHMSA to inspect even interstate pipelines and that helps free2062up resources. It does not help when there is duplication.2063    We have operators sometimes being investigated by the feds2064and the states. If we can align that we can spread those state2065and Federal inspection resources more broadly.2066    Senator Peters. But to the question, states do play a2067pretty important role?2068    Mr. Black. Absolutely, Senator. Yes.2069    Senator Peters. Mr. Leger.2070    Mr. Leger. Thank you.2071    Senator Peters. States play an important role?2072    Mr. Leger. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Peters, they absolutely do2073play an important role and we work with our state regulators on2074a daily basis for pipeline safety.2075    I do want to echo the damage prevention rules. I think that2076is something that is--certainly, that we can improve upon and I2077only call to attention Chairman Young's state, Indiana, which2078is one of the top states in damage prevention and you can see2079that by their damage prevention rates.2080    Senator Peters. Thank you. Mr. Rorick?2081    Mr. Rorick. Yes, I would also agree, Senator. The points2082that Mr. Leger and Mr. Black raised on the damage prevention2083program I do not think--cannot be emphasized enough and there2084are--I think there are opportunities to reduce some of the2085exemptions that occur to the damage prevention program,2086opportunities to improve the enforcement, and there are2087certainly opportunities to improve the coordination between the2088feds and the states for not only the inspection.2089    States do have the authority to increase their regulations2090on pipelines. I think it is important, though, that the feds2091and the states work collaboratively to ensure that there is no2092conflict in those regulations and in the enforcement.2093    Senator Peters. So work more collaboratively. But I think2094you all agree that states are an important part of this2095equation?2096    Mr. Rorick. Yes, sir.2097    Senator Peters. So, Mr. Caram, turning to you now because2098you raised this very topic in your written testimony, how would2099fully funding states at the allowed 80 percent serve to help2100the industry in achieving these zero incident targets that they2101all want to achieve?2102    Mr. Caram. Yes, thank you for that question.2103    As mentioned, the majority of the Nation's pipelines are2104under state oversight. They all need to follow minimum Federal2105safety regulations set by PHMSA, but the inspection and2106enforcement in most of these pipelines are run by the state.2107    In addition to that, nearly all of the Nation's2108distribution pipelines--those pipelines that bring gas into2109people's homes and businesses--are those that are under the2110inspection and enforcement authority of the state programs, and2111these are the pipelines that are closest to people and that2112lead to most of the fatalities and injuries.2113    So I cannot overstate enough the importance of a well-2114funded state program.2115    Senator Peters. Great. Thank you.2116    A bit more than four years ago on May 7th of 2021 a2117ransomware attack on the Colonial Pipeline caused significant2118impacts on communities from Texas to New York and highlighted,2119certainly, the importance of robust, timely cyber threat2120information and the sharing between private sector as well as2121Federal agencies.2122    I am very concerned that the upcoming expiration of the2123CISA 2015 liability protections for public-private cyber threat2124information could enable another attack like we saw on the2125Colonial Pipeline.2126    Mr. Rorick, Mr. Leger, would you agree that the expiration2127of information sharing and the liability protections associated2128with that under CISA 2015 would negatively impact pipeline2129cybersecurity?2130    Mr. Rorick. Yes, certainly we would and we would like to2131see that piece of legislation reauthorized as well. That2132legislation provides some criminal protections through privacy,2133through confidentiality, antitrust, that allow the information2134sharing to occur between the private and public sector.2135    The nation, as we are all well aware, is under constant2136threat and attack from cyber criminals. Our industry is2137certainly not immune to it and allowing the statute to get2138reauthorized will allow those protections to stay in place,2139which will enable industry to participate more robustly in that2140information sharing.2141    Senator Peters. And we just have a few more months before2142it expires.2143    Mr. Leger, do you want to add anything to that?2144    Mr. Leger. I cannot really add anything. I will say I am2145not the proper witness to talk about cybersecurity--I am an2146operator--but we are happy to get back with you and your office2147and this committee with a QFR.2148    Senator Peters. Great. Great. Well, thank you. Thank you,2149Mr. Chairman.2150    Senator Young. Senator Cruz.2151    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to each of2152the witnesses for being here.2153    Mr. Rorick, Mr. Leger, and Mr. Black, can you tell me about2154your members' experiences with unauthorized valve turners or2155protesters who damage pipeline construction sites? How often2156does this happen and what type of risks does this activity pose2157to pipeline safety?2158    Mr. Black. We have had a number of dangerous and2159destructive situations from attacks on pipelines. In 2016,2160opponents in four northern states cut through fences, cut2161through locks to turn valves on pipelines that brought 152162percent of our consumed crude oil.2163    In 2017, an activist in Iowa torched into pipeline2164components awaiting construction on Dakota Access Pipeline.2165Also in 2017 a pipeline protester armed with a high-powered2166rifle shot at the Sable Trail natural gas pipeline.2167    And, sadly, in 2022 there was a movie called ``How to Blow2168up a Pipeline'' that was released nationwide and that glorified2169violent action.2170    Attacks on pipelines risk hurting the environment, the2171people there, and even the perpetrators themselves.2172    Mr. Rorick. And if I could add, this issue tends to be2173somewhat sensitive, I think, unnecessarily. So we are not2174talking about the changes that we are proposing. We are not2175talking about squashing First Amendment rights to speech.2176    What we are talking about are things like this is just--2177this is a recent unclassified document from the Tennessee2178Fusion Center identifying a May 9 incident and just to read a2179couple of quick lines here. And this is an individual who went2180into the facility, tampered with it with a gas pipeline.2181    Local businesses and approximately 430 residents were2182evacuated due to gas in the air. The tampering impacted gas2183flow pressure, resulting in safety systems being activated.2184Responding gas company officials resolved the issues and2185restored system functions.2186    This is an example that happened just a few weeks ago where2187not only was there a safety risk and health and potentially2188life threatening issues that occurred not only to the2189individual, to the workers that had--fortunately, the safety2190systems kicked in.2191    The workers then had to go in and manage this and2192ameliorate the situation, but then it provided risk to all of2193those residents that are in the surrounding areas, not to2194mention the impacts to their service.2195    Mr. Leger. Beyond what was mentioned here, what I want to2196talk about is reiterate the cascading events of something like2197that, not to mention what was already said about the risk to2198the person completing the act but also the risk to our2199communities and the rest of my employees that have to respond2200to something like that.2201    Beyond that, you have cascading events where you have2202hospitals, critical care facilities, local police departments2203that were without gas that can no longer protect us and take2204care of our citizens.2205    And then if you have a really bad incident where you have2206to shut down a pipeline now you also have the danger of2207critical generating facilities that are now down and then now2208you do not have power for the area.2209    So it is a cascading event that I worry about.2210    The Chairman. Well, Mr. Black mentioned the outrageous2211movie ``How to Blow up a Pipeline.'' I am embarrassed to say my2212alma mater, Harvard, proudly screened that movie on campus and2213people wonder why so many Americans are losing faith in our so-2214called elite academic institutions when they are getting so2215extreme as trying to train young people on how to be2216ecoterrorists.2217    Mr. Caram, you testified before the House Transportation2218Infrastructure Committee that you agreed with the statement2219that people who damaged pipelines or threatened to damage2220pipelines, such as unauthorized valve turners, should be2221prosecuted to the full extent of the law because of the danger2222they put the public in. Do you still agree with that statement?2223    Mr. Caram. I do. The Pipeline Safety Trust does not support2224the creation of unsafe conditions on any pipelines.2225    The Chairman. Thank you.2226    Mr. Black and Mr. Rorick, PHMSA is authorized to grant2227special permits to pipeline operators in which PHMSA waives2228compliance with statute or regulation if PHMSA determines that2229the waiver is consistent with pipeline safety.2230    I have heard that PHMSA, particularly under the Biden2231administration, would add numerous additional requirements to2232special permits that were unrelated to the underlying2233regulation the permit was designed to address.2234    Can the two of you speak to this issue with special2235permits, particularly what extraneous requirements were added2236and what you propose to fix the special permit process?2237    Mr. Black. Congress created special permits for a good2238reason, right. There are so many different operating conditions2239of a pipeline. The types of--in operating conditions the types2240of pipe, is it a liquid, is it moving crude oil, is it2241products, is it hot, is it cold.2242    And so this has been a way for pipeline operators to go to2243PHMSA and say, I have got an equivalent way to do this that is2244different and that is better.2245    But PHMSA has ruined the special permit program. Other than2246special permits for class locations there have been very few2247because PHMSA was applying unrelated conditions and PHMSA was2248taking forever.2249    I have got a sad example of how PHMSA applied something2250that was just so loaded down with unrelated conditions that it2251was unusable.2252    Somebody had an application to deal with a dent a certain2253way and the regulations required something that they knew from2254their engineering assessment was not appropriate.2255    A simple permit request turned into 56 pages including 542256unrelated conditions that were not even the right type of2257pipeline. This was a liquids pipeline and they applied natural2258gas conditions.2259    Congress can fix this. Congress can tell PHMSA to not2260require extraneous conditions, unrelated conditions, to the2261issue being addressed in a special permit, and to act in a2262timely basis.2263    Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Cruz. Thank you, Mr.2264Black.2265    Mr. Lujan.22662267               STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN,2268                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO22692270    Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2271    Mr. Caram, New Mexico, as you know, is home to the Permian2272Basin and the Nation's second largest oil producer. In 20232273there was a study conducted of a comprehensive aerial2274measurement of oil and gas producing basins across the United2275States including the Permian Basin.2276    Those surveys found that the Permian Basin oil and gas2277operation had the highest total emissions observed anywhere in2278the United States. So even though New Mexico is not the largest2279producer, they were creating the largest methane plumes.2280    Mr. Caram, yes or no, is leaking methane from pipeline a2281public safety hazard?2282    Mr. Caram. It is, yes. We continue to have home explosions2283and pipeline failures from known leaks that have not been2284repaired.2285    Senator Lujan. Yes or no, does leaking methane from2286pipelines cause environmental harm?2287    Mr. Caram. Yes. Yes, it does.2288    Senator Lujan. Yes or no, is leaking methane from pipelines2289a waste of a natural resource into the air?2290    Mr. Caram. Yes.2291    Senator Lujan. So, arguably, it is also a taking of2292resources. When there is state land involved and there is2293leaking taking place that it is like taking taxpayer money,2294right?2295    Mr. Caram. Yes.2296    Senator Lujan. Yes or no, is advanced technology available2297to detect leaks in pipelines so operators can fix them?2298    Mr. Caram. Yes. Methane detection has come a long way in2299development.2300    Senator Lujan. Mr. Caram, how old are the existing rules2301and requirements for operators to conduct leak surveys of2302pipelines?2303    Mr. Caram. That particular part of the code is very old,2304has not been updated in decades.2305    Senator Lujan. And in one word how would you characterize2306the requirements on operators to survey for leaks in their2307pipelines and repair them?2308    Mr. Caram. Vague.2309    Senator Lujan. In the decades since those vague2310requirements were enacted we have seen preventable hazards and2311explosions that have taken lives and endangered people. Is that2312correct?2313    Mr. Caram. Sadly, yes.2314    Senator Lujan. In the decade since those vague requirements2315were enacted, have we seen technology to detect leaks advance?2316    Mr. Caram. Yes. Yes. That has come a long way.2317    Senator Lujan. Now, the last time the pipeline safety bill2318was reauthorized was in 2020, correct?2319    Mr. Caram. Correct.2320    Senator Lujan. That bill was signed by President Trump,2321correct?2322    Mr. Caram. Correct.2323    Senator Lujan. And that bill included a provision requiring2324the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration to2325write rules and regulations to leak--or sorry, regulations on2326leak detection and repair. Is that correct?2327    Mr. Caram. Yes.2328    Senator Lujan. And your organization was supportive of2329these measures, correct?2330    Mr. Caram. Yes, we were and are.2331    Senator Lujan. And those rules have been updated. Is that2332correct?2333    Mr. Caram. No. We went through a very long process. There2334was two weeks of advisory committee meetings, a Notice of2335Proposed Rulemaking, and a final rule was submitted to the2336Federal Register but at the very end of the last administration2337and it has since been withdrawn.2338    Senator Lujan. Now, this has been brought up in this2339hearing today. I think I read article after article that2340suggested the administration withdrew that rule because they2341were worried that under a new Republican Congress that there2342would be a CRA that would pull that rule out, and once that is2343done cannot touch it ever again.2344    I think that is important for the record for us to talk2345about these things. It was bipartisan. The Chair of this2346Committee was instrumental in important provisions and he is2347going to be instrumental in getting it again of the2348Subcommittee, and I look forward to working with him on this as2349well. It is critically important and that is why I appreciate2350this hearing so much.2351    Mr. Leger, your company CenterPoint Energy recently2352deployed an advanced leak detection technology, state-of-the-2353art, vehicle-mounted technology. Is that correct?2354    Mr. Leger. That is correct.2355    Senator Lujan. And how prepared after a long, transparent2356stakeholder engagement process is the industry to adopt the2357optimized leak detection and repair practices as issued by the2358agency in January?2359    Mr. Leger. Well, one thing I want to say it was not2360recently. We have actually been--deployed that system 10 years2361ago. So but I would say that we have valuable data that we are2362willing and able to share with our partners on that adoption of2363that technology.2364    Senator Lujan. That might encourage others to do the same.2365So I appreciate that good example that you have there, sir.2366    One of the questions that I also have in this area is how2367we work together. I am always reminded of how important our2368word is when we are working on legislation, when we are working2369on rules, things of that nature.2370    With your responsibility that you are here with today, can2371I get your commitment to work with me and with this committee2372to ensure that the industry does not backslide on commitments2373and agreements to update these rules?2374    Mr. Leger. Senator, myself and my partner companies across2375the United States as well as AGA are always willing to work2376with you guys. I will say that collaboration among the2377utilities is one of the beauties of our industry.2378    Senator Lujan. I appreciate that very much. Now, since I2379have a little time left one question that I have goes back to23802021. Are you all aware that there were frozen pipes out in2381Texas in 2021 of gas, Mr. Rorick?2382    Mr. Rorick. Yes.2383    Senator Lujan. Mr. Black, yes or no?2384    Mr. Black. Yes.2385    Senator Lujan. Mr. Leger?2386    Mr. Leger. Yes, sir.2387    Senator Lujan. Mr. Caram?2388    Mr. Caram. Yes.2389    Senator Lujan. Is there anything that should be done with2390weatherization? Because it impacted New Mexico as well.2391    Now, it just did not get as cold in New Mexico as it did in2392Texas with that liquid that was still in there. Is there2393something we could do around weatherization?2394    Mr. Leger? I think you know that CenterPoint had a pipe2395freeze.2396    Mr. Leger. Yes, absolutely. I will say that our2397distribution pipe system was not frozen up. We could have2398delivered the gas and we did deliver the gas during that2399timeframe, and I would say that as my opening comments when I2400mentioned in Minnesota gets very cold, right?2401    Sixty hours below zero and we successfully delivered 1.52402BCF. So yes, we can help.2403    Senator Lujan. And just, Mr. Chairman, I think this is one2404area that we might be able to find some commonality as well,2405understanding that some states, you know, like ERCOT or others2406depending on how those pipelines are done. But look forward to2407working with you there.2408    Senator Young. You know, and that--I will ask our Indiana2409steel makers whether there might be certain qualities of newer2410steel grades that could insulate, you know, the various2411products that go through pipes from the elements.2412    Yes, I have become an alchemist up here. OK. So Senator2413Moreno, you are recognized for questions.24142415               STATEMENT OF HON. BERNIE MORENO,2416                     U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO24172418    Senator Moreno. Thank you.2419    And before you leave, Mr. Lujan, I will invite you to Ohio2420if you want to know what cold is.2421    [Laughter.]2422    Senator Moreno. There you go. And then I will invite the2423Chairman to Ohio if he wants to learn about steel making. I am2424just kidding.2425    Senator Young. Top steel producer in the country. Go ahead.2426Please proceed.2427    [Laughter.]2428    Senator Moreno. I should not be so bold, given what the2429Pacers did to the Cavs.2430    Senator Fischer. Nebraska has a steel plant, too.2431    Senator Moreno. There you go. So I think maybe bring the2432conversation up from--no pun intended, from the underground2433level to maybe a little bit broader level and if I could have2434each of you just quickly respond to the following question.2435    What do you see coming in the next decade in terms of2436energy demand in America? We will start with from the left to2437right--our left to right. OK.2438    Mr. Leger. We see incredible growth in energy throughout2439the country. If you look at data centers, return to2440manufacturing, AI, these are all adding incredible amounts of2441demand.2442    This kind of if you build it they will come that has2443happened on the manufacturing and the data side and now we need2444to meet that with growing infrastructure developments as well2445to provide that energy.2446    Mr. Black. We expect growth and need pipeline operators to2447grow to meet it.2448    Mr. Leger. Yes. I mean data centers--and I am fortunate to2449serve some great areas in Indiana and Texas and Ohio and2450Minnesota. In particular, in Texas there is a ton of growth,2451and we are in the process of building pipeline--of planning to2452build a pipeline around the City of Houston to better serve.2453    But that being said, you have also got an energy transition2454going on that will rely on the natural gas industry to be able2455to serve industry as the country continues to grow and onshore2456more manufacturing.2457    Mr. Caram. This is outside of the mission of the Pipeline2458Safety Trust but I will say that we need to see improvements to2459the laws and regulations before the buildout of more energy2460infrastructure to keep communities safe.2461    Senator Moreno. OK. And I will go back to Mr. Black because2462I think it is important for you to repeat what you said in your2463opening statement.2464    If we have to deliver energy, right, energy does not just2465show up, right? You have to get it to some place. I used to2466live in New England for 12 years and I find it interesting that2467a lot of my colleagues from that neck of the woods talk about2468the importance of climate change and safety and delivery when a2469lot of energy is still delivered by truck.2470    You have people showing up at your door with energy that is2471delivered on a diesel vehicle with all kinds of perilous2472issues.2473    So if you had to deliver energy what is the safest way?2474Safety. Forget cost. Just the safest way to deliver energy?2475    Mr. Caram. By pipeline, and government reports confirm2476that.2477    Senator Moreno. So then it seems counterintuitive that if2478you cared about safety you would cripple pipelines, correct?2479    Mr. Caram. Correct.2480    Senator Moreno. And then let us take it now to the point of2481cost, because for a lot of working Americans that is the2482number-one issue.2483    So for a lot of us we can say, well, safety matters and, of2484course, nobody does not want safety. That is, obviously,2485nonsense. Nobody would want these disasters to happen. But what2486is the cost difference of getting this wrong?2487    Mr. Black, I will ask you.2488    Mr. Black. Liquid pipelines are not just the safest way to2489move the fuels that we use. They are also the least costly.2490    So liquid fuels will move on other modes that cost more and2491have poor safety records and those costs will ultimately be2492passed on to consumers and the poorest of us pay the most for2493energy.2494    Senator Moreno. And as a proud Ohioan, we, with West2495Virginia and Pennsylvania, have the largest reserves of natural2496gas in America and yet our producers have been absolutely2497hammered with their inability to get affordable, abundant,2498cost-effective natural gas to New England specifically and they2499rely on Canada for the vast majority of their energy demands,2500and the reason for that is simple. They refuse to allow2501pipelines to be built to get and service those consumers.2502    Is that--explain to me how that works. Explain to me how2503the logic of saying we would rather get energy from Canada2504through diesel trucks and through rail and, by the way, through2505ships across the Great Lakes. How does that make any sense?2506    Mr. Black. Our country is blessed with energy abundance but2507we need pipelines to get it from where it is produced to where2508it is used.2509    And I do not represent natural gas pipelines. Mr. Rorick2510does. But it is just a few hundred miles where we have got2511surpluses of natural gas to where they are needed in New2512England.2513    Senator Moreno. And my final question is this and whomever2514wants to answer it can answer it.2515    We had Senator Peters talk about Line 5, something I care a2516lot about--I think the Chairman cares a lot about. What would2517be the impact? Right now, there is something that is not very2518well reported.2519    You have the Governor of one state wanting to shut down2520that pipeline. What would be the impact of shutting down that2521pipeline?2522    Mr. Black. Lots of Midwest Americans use Canadian crude for2523the gasoline in their car. Lots of propane users and farmers in2524Michigan depend on Line 5. So the impact of Line 5 being shut2525down would be dramatic to the Midwest economy.2526    But there is an answer. There is a tunnel that is being2527proposed. Sadly, it has been under review for 5 years. If that2528tunnel can be developed we will have an even safer way to move2529the fuel that Ohio and Michiganders and others need.2530    Senator Moreno. And just--I know I am out of time but just2531quick follow up. Who is holding up the building of that tunnel?2532    Mr. Black. The state of Michigan.2533    Senator Moreno. So the same Governor who is trying to shut2534down the pipeline is refusing to approve the tunnel that would2535fix said pipeline. Seems to me the agenda is not about safety.2536It is not about affordability. It is about an attack on fossil2537fuels.2538    And with that, I will yield my time back.2539    Senator Young. Senator Markey.25402541               STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,2542                U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS25432544    Senator Markey. Yes. So, thank you.2545    So let me just explain what the natural gas industry is2546doing to New England. The natural gas industry was asked by2547Donald Trump to pony up tens of millions of dollars last year2548for his campaign and if he did it--if they did it in the2549natural gas industry he would destroy the offshore wind2550industry.2551    He would destroy the clean energy revolution. And by the2552way, he is doing it. He is asking House Republicans on the2553Energy and Commerce Committee and the Ways and Means Committee2554to destroy the clean energy industry. They are doing it. They2555did it yesterday. Did it today, just destroy it.2556    It is not all of the above. Here is why. The natural gas2557industry is used to generate electricity. We were, until Trump2558showed up, going to have 30,000 megawatts of offshore winds and2559Trump is saying, no, it is all debt.2560    And who is the beneficiary? The natural gas industry. Oh,2561we need to build more pipelines in. See the need in New2562England. And we are saying to the natural gas industry, we do2563not need you anymore. OK. We have offshore wind.2564    So the natural gas industry has paid to have Trump through2565his Department of Interior and Department of Energy kill the2566offshore wind industry. Now, we have one more final plant,2567Vineyard Wind. That is 800 megawatts. That is equal to a2568nuclear power plant ready to go.2569    But he wants to kill the battery storage industry, wants to2570kill all of it. It is not all of the above, OK, and the natural2571gas industry just cannot accept the fact that we have figured2572out how to do it.2573    And by the way, Trump is also imposing tariffs on and2574having a trade war with Canada. Quebec Hydro and northern2575Maine--northern New England--that is how we do it. We have2576partnerships with them, right.2577    So Trump is killing us and then the natural gas industry2578says, we will come in. We will solve the problem for you.2579    You know, we do not need anything from Canada. We do not2580need any electricity from offshore wind even though that is2581what we want, that is what the states want, that is what the2582states are investing in. That is what they are trying to permit2583for.2584    Natural gas is asking for Trump to come in to kill it2585saying, we do not need any more natural gas. OK. We already2586have our indigenous resources. Quebec Hydro, offshore wind,2587solar. Massachusetts is number two per capita in installation2588of solar.2589    We will figure it out. We just need some--we need some2590cooperation. OK. So just understand the natural gas industry2591with crocodile tears appears here, you know, as though they2592really care about New England and they want to make sure they2593can deal with our energy issues.2594    We already figured it out. They are trying to kill our plan2595so that they can substitute their plan which is more fossil2596fuels, more greenhouse gasses and, by the way, hurricane season2597starts in two more weeks, OK, and they are gutting FEMA. So2598that is a recipe for disaster as well.2599    So let me--I will ask one quick question. Pipelines pose a2600significant risk to public safety and the environment, an issue2601that is personal here in Massachusetts.2602    A constituent of mine, an 18-year-old, Leonel Rondon, died2603in the Merrimack Valley gas explosions in 2018 as a result of2604negligence and missing pipeline safety rules.2605    As we transition to clean energy we have to limit the2606significant risk that pipelines pose to public safety and the2607environment, and this is why last year I introduced my Pipeline2608Accountability, Safety and Environmental Standards Act to2609enhance public safety, environmental integrity, transparency of2610pipeline operations across the United States, and I will2611reintroduce it again very soon.2612    Here is what the bill does. Mandates updated safety2613standards to apply to existing pipelines. Require technology2614that isolates pipelines during catastrophic failure so it does2615not spread.2616    Mandate disclosures of pipeline safety data to the public2617and to do so much more to improve pipeline safety and2618accountability.2619    Mr. Caram, do you agree that these provisions in my bill2620are necessary in order to serve as a preventative against the2621reoccurrence of what happened in Lawrence just a few years ago?2622    Mr. Caram. I do, yes, and the Pipeline Safety Trust does2623believe that, and thank you for your leadership, Senator2624Markey, in the aftermath of Merrimack Valley and continuing in2625pipeline safety.2626    Senator Markey. Yes. And a lot of the law that we passed,2627the regulations that are put in place, are basically educated2628by what happened in Lawrence.2629    To a certain extent it was the trigger for all the reforms2630that we have in place. Could you expand on that, Mr. Caram?2631    Mr. Caram. Yes. It is said often that the regulations we2632have are written in blood, and often after awful tragedies like2633what we saw in Merrimack Valley there are lessons learned and2634regulations updated.2635    A lot of--my written testimony is trying to stay ahead of2636those kinds of tragedies and preventing them from happening in2637the first place.2638    But the way the system is set up and the way it has2639functioned is that often we wait until the awful happens and2640then the regulations are updated.2641    Senator Markey. Yes, and the job of this committee is to2642look ahead and lead the way, to not wait for the catastrophe to2643inform us but to take the evidence from experts and then to put2644the safeguards in.2645    Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Markey.2646    Senator Fischer, you are recognized for questions.26472648                STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER,2649                   U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA26502651    Senator Fischer. Thank you, Chairman Young, for conducting2652this hearing today.2653    As the former chairman of this subcommittee I had the2654opportunity to lead the authorization of PHMSA in both 2015 and26552020. In each case this subcommittee and this full committee2656worked diligently to reach a bipartisan product that passed the2657Senate unanimously.2658    But, unfortunately, following the passage of the PIPES Act2659in 2020 the Biden administration undercut those bipartisan2660efforts through a heavy-handed regulatory approach, acting2661outside the bipartisan congressional intent.2662    Mr. Rorick and Mr. Black, could you speak to the effects of2663this approach and steps this committee can take to rectify2664those impacts?2665    Mr. Leger. Absolutely, Senator Fischer. Thank you for the2666question, and we touched on this a little bit earlier.2667    The administration--the previous administration really2668expanded the remit--expanded PHMSA's remit beyond their2669congressional mandate into environmental issues like climate2670change.2671    We talked about the leak detection and repair rule. It is a2672great example where PHMSA, under the Biden administration,2673expanded beyond the focus of this committee and PHMSA's role to2674address safety and look at issues like the social cost of2675carbon to then expand the purview of that particular rule and2676thus diluting not only the effectiveness of the rule but then2677diluting the focus and the resources on issues beyond safety.2678    Senator Fischer. Thank you.2679    Mr. Black.2680    Mr. Black. I have been doing this a while. I remember your2681leadership on both of those bills. Thank you.2682    Two things come to mind about the 2020 PIPES Act. First is2683pipelines. PHMSA was authorized to do pipeline safety2684technology demonstrations----2685    Senator Fischer. And under the Biden administration they2686did not address the requirement from the law.2687    Mr. Black.--and they ruined it. Absolutely. And you have2688got the opportunity, sadly and please, to reauthorize that and2689this time tell them not to do the things that they did wrong.2690    Second, you had a provision called ``operating status''2691which called upon PHMSA to have regulations unique to pipelines2692that are idled for market conditions but will one day come onto2693the market--come back onto the market. It is wasteful to2694everybody, to PHMSA and to pipeline operators, to be applying2695rules that do not fit there.2696    PHMSA never acted on that even though Congress told them to2697do it and gave them a deadline. So it would help if you would2698tell them again to do it, and we are encouraged that they2699might. But it is important, like you say, for PHMSA to do what2700Congress says.2701    Senator Fischer. Thank you.2702    Mr. Rorick, PHMSA--during the Biden administration they2703also acted outside that primary mission, as you said, so many2704of the requirements that they set and enacted under authorities2705which were not in the law that was passed they duplicated2706existing authorities that, for example, EPA has or DOE has.2707    As we move forward as a committee we want to make sure that2708those safety standards are met, that pipelines remain the safe2709way to transport these fuels. Do you have any suggestions on2710what we can do with it?2711    Mr. Rorick. Yes, ma'am. There are certainly some great2712opportunities, as we have discussed, to improve and move2713forward with those unfinished mandates that you all have laid2714out that PHMSA has yet to fulfill. There are other great2715opportunities.2716    As you are well aware, API is a standard setting2717organization. We have a number of standards that PHMSA directly2718references in their regulations. In many instances they have2719referenced standards that are two or three editions old.2720    That creates conflict within our industry in these2721standards which move faster than the regulations. We are able2722to use, as Mr. Young talked about earlier, the latest2723technologies, the latest engineering practices.2724    It would be very helpful if PHMSA--and we talked about it2725in our written testimony--were to be able to move forward with2726the program to periodically review those regulations and ensure2727that they are referencing the latest standards, and if they are2728not then we need to have that dialog to ensure that what2729industry is talking about doing and what we are using does not2730conflict with the regulations, as another great example.2731    Senator Fischer. Thank you very much.2732    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.2733    Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Fischer.2734    Senator Cantwell, you are recognized for questions.27352736               STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,2737                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON27382739    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate2740this hearing very much.2741    In 1999 the Olympic Pipeline exploded, killing three people2742in Bellingham, Washington. In response to this tragedy the2743Pipeline Safety Trust was created to hold pipeline companies2744and the government accountable in improving pipeline safety.2745    So very much appreciate, Mr. Caram, you being here today.2746    A few years later in 2004, following the increased calls2747for better oversight, Congress established the Pipeline2748Hazardous Materials Safety Administration--PHMSA--a new agency2749dedicated to pipeline safety.2750    So, however, as we sit here today 26 years later it is2751clear that we still need to do more because these incidents can2752have unbelievable impacts.2753    Over the last 20 years pipeline incidents have caused 2572754deaths and more than 1,000 injuries and over $11 billion in2755damages. Excuse me if this has been brought up in the hearing2756thus far. I do not know if it has, but this is really important2757data.2758    And that is an average of 12 fatalities and 51 injuries and2759$550 million of property damage per year. So we need to do2760better.2761    Just last month in Lexington, Missouri, a 5-year-old boy2762died when a contractor hit a pipeline that had not been2763properly marked by a pipeline company, causing a leak and an2764explosion, and since 2019, the last time the Committee2765considered pipeline safety, a number of significant issues have2766merged and I know from your testimony that those have been2767discussed today.2768    But I wanted to ask you, Mr. Caram, since just this year we2769know those averages I just mentioned, but during the Trump2770administration in the first three months I feel like we have2771less than two enforcement cases.2772    Are you concerned about this?2773    Mr. Caram. Yes. Thank you for bringing that up.2774    We are concerned about the drop off of enforcement. This2775is--we have not seen it in previous administrations.2776Enforcement cases initiated have generally been consistent2777throughout administrations regardless of party, and so we are2778concerned to see this drastic sudden drop off.2779    Senator Cantwell. Well, I am sending a letter to Mr.2780Kochman today asking him about this and asking him about the2781recent data, and just--you know, I want to do everything we can2782to prevent and if there is something that has happened that is2783actually preventing this or we are just not seeing the2784enforcement.2785    So we need to understand what is happening. So I will be2786sending him a letter today asking about enforcement actions.2787    I also wanted to ask you--my state is very prone to2788landslides and, certainly, a potential--as we call it, the big2789one--earthquake.2790    According to the USGS, 44 percent of the country is at2791risk, though, of experiencing landslides and people who live in2792these earthquake prone zones.2793    So what--they have a, I think, a voluntary standard at2794PHMSA but what should we be doing to think about this? And I do2795not know whether that Missouri case had anything to do with2796land moving or not but----2797    Mr. Caram. The Missouri case did not, but many recent2798pipeline incidents have been caused by these factors called2799geohazards. I think we have learned a lot more about pipeline2800failures and we are attributing more--able to attribute more2801and more to geohazards.2802    It is not specifically called out in the regulations.2803Operators on high-consequence areas are required to identify2804all potential risks and mitigate against those and that2805ostensibly would include geohazards.2806    But we would like to see specific geohazard regulations2807called out by name and spelled out prescriptively and2808performance-based throughout the regulations.2809    PHMSA has issued a voluntary advisory bulletin. The2810industry has developed a relatively strong standard around2811geohazard mitigation and it is time to incorporate geohazard2812regulations.2813    Senator Cantwell. Well, we probably did not quite imagine2814it either until we had Oso, Washington how devastating a2815landslide could be. It killed 40 people when literally the side2816of a mountain exploded.2817    And so I do think with change in conditions we definitely2818need to think about this. What about material issues, this2819candy factory in Reading, Pennsylvania killing seven people and2820injuring 10 others.2821    NTSB found the cause was a pipe made out of Aldyl A, which,2822I guess, is subject to failure. What do we need to do to make2823sure that that kind of material does not exist in pipes?2824    Mr. Caram. Yes. Aldyl A plastic has been known to be an2825issue of material prone to failure for decades. Again, in a2826voluntary advisory PHMSA bulletin it has been out for quite2827some time.2828    In addition to that awful West Reading failure there was a2829failure in South Jordan, Utah, that killed a 15-year-old boy.2830We do not know the exact cause, but we do know Aldyl A was also2831part of that failure.2832    I think we know enough and we have seen enough failures2833that it is time to have operators find all of this Aldyl A and2834take it out of their system.2835    Senator Cantwell. Thank you. Thank you.2836    All of these statistics, Mr. Chairman, are just striking to2837me that we still have this much--you know, 12 fatalities, 512838injuries, and $550 million in property damage every year. It is2839too many.2840    So I look forward to working with you and the Chairman on2841these issues. Thank you.2842    Senator Young. Well, likewise. Thanks so much, Senator2843Cantwell, for your leadership on this and so many other2844important issues.2845    Senator Peters earlier brought up the issue of2846cybersecurity and I am glad he did. PHMSA is a pipeline safety2847regulator. TSA is, however, the primary regulator of pipeline2848security including cybersecurity.2849    While both agencies have distinct roles, I want to know2850from our witnesses, any that wish to speak on this topic, do2851you think there could be better coordination between TSA and2852PHMSA or, perhaps, other agencies?2853    Mr. Leger. So I can speak to that, Senator, and you bring2854up a great point. We have seen over the last few years that TSA2855has really increased their oversight on cybersecurity issues.2856    They worked extremely well with the industry to not only2857address threats or address incidents when they occur but really2858proactively address the threats as well.2859    There is always opportunities for better improvement on2860coordination and collaboration between the agencies and,2861frankly, between the private and the public sector and so we2862would look forward to working with both of those agencies to do2863that.2864    Senator Young. I expect all of you will agree that there2865are opportunities for better coordination--there is in every2866organization so I--but any specific recommendations folks can2867think of that--OK, great.2868    What role should the Federal Government have in pipeline2869security and what are operators doing right now on this issue,2870if anything?2871    Mr. Black. Pipeline security and cybersecurity are both2872very important. TSA is on the case. Pipeline operators are2873looking at TSA guidelines or having visits from TSA inspectors,2874and we know that it is an important part of maintaining the2875operations of pipelines.2876    Mr. Leger. We have active physical security and2877cybersecurity programs in place that are actually protecting2878our facilities.2879    Senator Young. OK. I will continue to educate myself on2880this issue. I know that other members will be emphasizing the2881importance of this.2882    I mean, pipelines, after all, they are critical security to2883our economic security, to our national security, and so the2884Federal Government has an inherently important role here.2885    Yes, Mr. Black.2886    Mr. Black. I thought of one way that Congress can help on2887security, right. Senator Cruz talked about loopholes that are2888not deterring those who might damage a pipeline, right?2889    The pipeline safety laws against damaging pipelines do not2890cover when a pipeline is in preoperational status and does not2891cover attacks that do not damage at the time.2892    We know that if something was damaged before it was2893constructed and it came into operation there could be an2894incident hurting people, the environment, and the perpetrators2895if they are still there.2896    We also know that there can be valve turning that does not2897cause damage then but can weaken the pipeline and later2898contribute to a rupture.2899    Senator Cruz talked about a Sheehy bill that he co-2900sponsored. I encourage the Committee to look at this. That is a2901way that the Senate can help secure pipelines from attacks.2902    Senator Young. Absolutely. Well, I will consult with both2903Senators Cruz and Sheehy on that. It sounds like an area of2904vulnerability that we may need to button up.2905    You know, the last thing I would like to discuss with you2906is outdated rulemakings. The PIPES Act of 2020, which Senator2907Fischer showed great leadership on, that reauthorization2908required PHMSA to hold a gas pipeline advisory committee, or2909GPAC, meeting on the class location rule.2910    While GPAC has meant to address class location PHMSA has2911yet to complete this rulemaking, probably unsurprising since2912PHMSA did not have a Senate confirmed leader over recent years.2913    If it was finalized, pipeline companies could employ modern2914inspection technologies to prove the safety of existing2915infrastructure when population changes occur nearby instead of2916outdated, expensive, and environmentally unhelpful methods.2917    Mr. Rorick, do you think that this rulemaking would improve2918safety and avoid disruptions to communities by employing2919modernized practices?2920    Mr. Rorick. Absolutely, Senator, and thank you for bringing2921up that critical issue.2922    Since that rule--since the original requirements were2923developed they were very prescriptive in their approach, and as2924we have talked a lot about technology and as you focused a lot2925about technology it has advanced rapidly.2926    The rules--the way they are written require when certain2927criteria are met for those pipes to automatically be pulled out2928of service and replaced.2929    In many instances those pipes do not need to be pulled out2930of service and the latest technologies that we have can assess2931those pipelines in a way that is less invasive, and we can make2932those determinations that many of those pipelines do not have2933to be pulled out.2934    Unnecessarily pulling out pipeline increases risk for the2935workers. It creates disruption in service. There is--a study2936was recently completed that shows that the amount of pipe that2937is replaced and the gas that has to get blown down from those2938service--in other words, we have to clear that gas so that we2939can replace that pipe--there is enough gas that is released on2940an annual basis to provide energy for 10,000 homes.2941    That is unnecessary risk, unnecessary interruptions to2942energy deliverability that we can avoid, and unnecessary costs2943for the industry where we can redirect those attentions to2944other safety issues that really demand our attention.2945    Mr. Caram. Chair Young, may I just quickly add something?2946    Senator Young. You may, sir. Yes.2947    Mr. Caram. Thank you. I just want to provide a little2948context there and just remind everyone what we are talking2949about.2950    This is--we have different standards on pipelines based on2951how--the population density around that pipeline and in a very2952rural area it is generally thinner walled pipe and the more2953populated the area the stronger the pipe needs to be.2954    So when we are talking about class location change we are2955talking about when a neighborhood or population has built up2956around this pipeline that was--has the thickness set for a very2957rural area.2958    So while we do not oppose some, you know, reforms to class2959location and the class location rule process, we just want to2960caution this is a very sensitive issue and could be--we have2961some serious safety issues and so we appreciate care and2962concern on that.2963    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Caram.2964    That will be--we will keep that thought in mind as well.2965Thank you so much.2966    Well, listen, were there things--before we close here today2967were there any particular points that our witnesses who offered2968very intelligent testimony today wished to make throughout the2969course of this hearing but did not have the opportunity?2970    I will give you an opportunity. Thirty seconds each if2971any--like, Mr. Rorick?2972    Mr. Rorick. Yes, we have a list of items that the2973Committee--that we would welcome the Committee to consider. We2974have got them written down in a pamphlet here.2975    We will be happy to share those with you. But there are a2976number of issues that we would be happy to discuss with you2977further.2978    Senator Young. We will give everyone that opportunity until2979the end of the day on Thursday, June 5, to respond to our2980questions and to make additional submissions that can go into2981the record.2982    But, Mr. Black, anything right now?2983    Mr. Black. We encourage you to reauthorize pipeline safety2984demonstration pilot projects, to fix the special permit2985process, to deter attacks and improve criminal penalties and2986reauthorize the pipeline safety laws.2987    This committee has an important role in assuring the public2988that the laws and regulations are good. Thank you for acting on2989it.2990    Mr. Leger. I concur with everything that my panelists have2991said, but I would add the creating a voluntary information2992sharing system--we did not talk about that--and I believe that2993is a best practice. It is something that we do as a utility and2994I think when you--you know, for us, like, it was mentioned2995earlier about SMS.2996    We are reaching out outside of the utility industry to talk2997about airlines on SMS. Just different perspectives, different2998things that you can learn to only make us all better.2999    Senator Young. I am glad you brought that up.3000    Mr. Caram.3001    Mr. Caram. Thank you, Chair Young.3002    I just want to refocus a bit. There was a lot of time spent3003talking about these unsafe terror attacks which, of course, we3004do not support those creation of unsafe conditions on3005pipelines.3006    But all the fatalities we have talked about today, you3007know, the vast majority, if not all, of the 3,000 reportable3008incidents that have happened over the last five or six years3009those are not attributable to this.3010    And so I just want to refocus on the conditions that are3011causing these fatalities and failures.3012    And the last thing I will say, I think, is the--a big low-3013hanging fruit following an NTSB recommendation would be the3014required adoption of in-home methane detectors will undoubtedly3015save lives and make a big difference.3016    Senator Young. Thank you.3017    Thanks again to all our witnesses for their testimony here3018today. Senators will have until the close of business on3019Thursday, May 22, to submit questions for the record. The3020witnesses, again, have until the end of the day Thursday, June30215, to respond to those questions.3022    This concludes today's hearing. The Committee stands3023adjourned.3024    [Whereupon, at 11:37 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]30253026                            A P P E N D I X30273028                                  GPA Midstream Association3029                                                       May 13, 20253030Chairman Todd Young,3031Dirksen Senate Office Building,3032Washington, DC.30333034Ranking Member Gary Peters,3035Dirksen Senate Office Building,3036Washington, DC.30373038Re: Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines, and3039            Safety hearing titled ``Pipeline Safety Reauthorization:3040            Ensuring the Safe and Efficient Movement of American3041            Energy''30423043Dear Chairman Young and Ranking Member Peters,30443045    On behalf of GPA Midstream (GPA or the Association), we appreciate3046the opportunity to submit comments on this important hearing, which3047will review pipeline safety regulations and operations at the Pipeline3048and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and evaluate what3049policy priorities should be included in an upcoming PHMSA pipeline3050safety reauthorization. We are grateful for the Subcommittee's work3051towards developing pipeline safety legislation.3052    GPA Midstream has served the U.S. energy industry since 1921 and3053represents more than 50 domestic corporate members that directly employ305457,000 employees engaged in the gathering, transporting, processing,3055treating, storage, and marketing of natural gas, natural gas liquids,3056crude oil and refined products, commonly referred to as ``midstream3057activities.'' The work of our members indirectly creates or impacts an3058additional 400,000 jobs across the U.S. economy. In 2023, GPA Midstream3059members had an economic impact of $206.2 billion through operating more3060than 506,000 miles of gas gathering pipelines, gathering more than 913061billion cubic feet per day of natural gas, and operating more than 3653062natural gas processing facilities that delivered pipeline quality gas3063into markets across a majority of the U.S. interstate and intrastate3064pipeline systems.3065Safety is Paramount3066    Pipeline safety is the top priority of GPA's members. According to3067the U.S. Department of Transportation, pipelines are the safest way to3068transport crude oil, refined products, and natural gas over the long3069distances necessary to deliver energy to everyone who needs it.\1\3070Midstream companies invest in technological advancements that3071significantly increase pipeline safety through monitoring operating3072conditions and product flows. GPA's members are focused on ensuring3073regulatory compliance and collaborate with other industry stakeholders3074on proactive, voluntary efforts to further the safety of their assets.3075---------------------------------------------------------------------------3076    \1\ ``Data and Statistics Overview.'' PHMSA's Office of Pipeline3077Safety (OPS). https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/data-and-statistics/pipeline/3078data-and-statistics-overview.3079---------------------------------------------------------------------------3080Unleashing American Energy3081    GPA is appreciative of the Subcommittee's support of pipelines3082playing a key role in unleashing America's energy independence and3083ensuring Americans have access to reliable and affordable energy. We3084look forward to working with all of Congress, as well as the3085Administration to restore American energy independence. Practical3086public policy can be implemented to allow for America's energy3087dominance.3088Key Issues and Recommendations3089  1.  Remove duplicative in-plant piping oversight30903091     GPA asks the Subcommittee to use this opportunity to align3092            gas and liquid in-plant piping exceptions and confirm that3093            all piping within a plant boundary qualifies as in-plant3094            piping and should not be subject to PHMSA oversight.30953096      Many GPA members operate processing, refining, and other types of3097            plant facilities. These facilities include gas piping on3098            plant grounds that serves plant facilities, or transfers3099            gas among adjacent or nearby plants. While the U.S. Code3100            includes exemptions for hazardous liquid in-plant piping3101            systems at production, refining, or manufacturing3102            facilities, gas in-plant piping does not have the clarity3103            of similar exemptions.31043105      In-plant gas piping systems are a low risk to the public, which3106            supports their exemption from PHMSA regulation. The systems3107            are mostly located within plant boundaries and often3108            operate at lower pressures than cross-country, PHMSA3109            regulated pipelines. Additionally, plant facilities are3110            often subject to other safety regulatory programs, such as3111            the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's3112            (OSHA's) Process Safety Management (PSM) requirements.31133114  2.  Appropriate representation on the Gas Pipeline Advisory Committee3115        (GPAC):31163117     GPA asks that the Subcommittee provide direction to PHMSA3118            to ensure appropriate stakeholders are included in the3119            conversation of regulatory actions that impact gathering3120            and processing.31213122      PHMSA utilizes two technical safety standards committees in its3123            rulemaking efforts, and GPA is appreciative of how these3124            groups support this work. However, during recent rulemaking3125            efforts, which have had significant impacts on the3126            gathering lines GPA members operate, there has been no3127            representation from a stakeholder focused on operation of3128            gathering lines.31293130      Given the potential for certain rulemakings to substantially3131            impact GPA members, either positively or negatively,3132            representation should be afforded to an operator engaged in3133            gathering and processing.31343135  3.  Longer Reauthorization Period:31363137     GPA requests the Subcommittee reauthorize PHMSA for a3138            longer period.31393140      PHMSA plays a critical role in ensuring the safe transportation3141            of natural gas and liquids across the United States.3142            Extending its authorization for a longer time would provide3143            an opportunity for the regulator to complete Congressional3144            mandates before being given other obligations. A longer3145            reauthorization period could also unleash technology3146            adoption and utilization of innovation. While innovation3147            can happen quickly, there needs to be proper time allotted,3148            whether for technology to advance or the market to adopt.3149            Providing more time between reauthorizations will ensure3150            technology can mature to a point for operators to be3151            comfortable to incorporate in their operations. Lastly, a3152            longer authorization window allows industry stakeholders to3153            gain experience and ensure compliance with new3154            requirements, ultimately benefiting public safety.3155Conclusion3156    Reauthorizing pipeline safety programs is vital for protecting our3157communities. GPA urges the Subcommittee to consider the recommendations3158outlined above to support PHMSA's work. Thank you for allowing us to3159provide this input, and we are happy to be a resource as the3160legislative process progresses.3161                                 ______31623163                  Associated General Contractors of America3164                                                       May 19, 202531653166Chairman Todd Young,3167Subcommittee on Surface3168Transportation, Freight, Pipelines,3169and Safety,3170United States Senate,3171Wahington, DC.31723173Ranking Member Gary Peters,3174Subcommittee on Surface3175Transportation, Freight, Pipelines,3176and Safety,3177United States Senate,3178Washington, DC.31793180RE: AGC Statement for the Record for the Hearing Entitled ``Pipeline3181            Safety Reauthorization: Ensuring the Safe and Efficient3182            Movement of American Energy''31833184Dear Chairman Young and Ranking Member Peters:31853186    On behalf of the Associated General Contractors of America--the3187leading association in the construction industry representing more than318828,000 firms, including America's leading general contractors and3189specialty-contracting firms--I thank you for holding the hearing3190entitled, ``Pipeline Safety Reauthorization: Ensuring the Safe and3191Efficient Movement of American Energy.''3192    AGC members are engaged in utility construction, including water3193and wastewater facilities and pipelines, energy generation and3194transmission, and telecommunications infrastructure. For pipeline3195construction, this includes maintenance and repair, excavation,3196tunneling, boring and site preparation. Contractors are on the front3197lines of pipeline safety, and reauthorizing Pipeline and Hazardous3198Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) would ensure the continued3199support of important safety programs related to our Nation's pipeline3200infrastructure.3201Robust Funding for State One-Call Notification Programs3202    AGC urges robust funding for state One-Call Notification Programs,3203which are key in mitigating damages from excavation nationwide and3204ensuring timely locates. According to a survey of AGC members published3205in January 2025, contractors are aware of 811 requirements and the3206local laws they are required to follow. However, 87 percent of3207contractors report that it takes longer than one business day for3208locators to arrive at job sites to mark underground utility lines,3209including gas and other hazardous materials pipelines, while one-3210quarter of respondents' state that it takes five or more business days3211for location crews to arrive and mark utilities.3212    Supporting One-Call Notification programs through PHMSA3213reauthorization will ensure that underground pipeline lines have more3214support to be correctly and expeditiously marked, mitigating challenges3215and weaknesses that could cause a critical accident.3216Require Vertical Line Locating, Marking and Mapping3217    Congress should require vertical line marking in the3218reauthorization of PHMSA, which would improve safety planning and3219operations for contractors, locators and pipeline operators. PHMSA3220reauthorization has previously included strict requirements for the3221correct marking of horizontal utility and construction lines, which3222locate underground infrastructure systems. While these lines make it3223easier for contractors and utility locators to know where utilities3224are, horizontal markings do not indicate their depth. Requiring3225vertical line markings allows locators and contractors to see how deep3226utilities are buried, improving the safe development of pipelines and3227ensuring safety efforts are strictly implemented throughout all levels3228of the construction process. Additionally, Congress should require3229vertical lines be mapped by locators and made publicly available for3230all pipeline stakeholders. Requiring and publishing vertical maps will3231allow contractors to see the depth of utility lines and pipelines that3232need to be expanded, better preparing them for work and mitigating3233damage that could arise due to conducting digging activities that can3234severely damage pipes at improper vertical depths.3235    AGC thanks the subcommittee for holding this important hearing and3236looks forward to working with its members on the reauthorization of3237PHMSA. Congress must ensure that the construction and safety of our3238pipeline system remains efficient.3239            Sincerely,3240                                               Alex Etchen,3241                              Vice President, Government Relations.3242                                 ______32433244   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to3245                              Robin Rorick3246PHMSA Inspector Resources3247    Not only does PHMSA need trained pipeline safety inspectors, but it3248needs engineers and scientists who understand how pipelines work. The3249result will be improved safety requirements and more oversight over the3250pipeline industry.32513252    Question 1. Do you believe PHMSA should be hiring additional3253experts?3254    Answer. Safety is our industry's top priority, and API agrees a3255PHMSA that is properly resourced with individuals with necessary levels3256of competency and knowledge of operations under their remit is3257critical. In particular, pipeline safety inspections require a3258significant understanding of engineering technologies and processes,3259and API supports PHMSA's efforts to recruit a qualified and capable3260workforce.32613262    Question 2. Federal pipeline safety officials' ability to make more3263money in the industry, how can we better retain and recruit these3264highly skilled employees?3265    Answer. PHMSA struggles to retain quality inspectors under current3266government personnel rules and pay scales, especially when competing3267with industry for quality employees. Congress may want to consider an3268approach to allow inspectors to be in a more competitive service pay3269scale.32703271    Question 3. States are currently only reimbursed for 55 percent of3272their pipeline inspection activities. Do you think Congress should3273provide increased funding for state inspectors?3274    Answer. Under current regulation, PHMSA has the ability to3275reimburse states up to 80 percent of the total cost of the personnel,3276equipment, and activities reasonably required by the State agency for3277conducting its pipeline safety or underground natural gas storage3278program during a given calendar year. With PHMSA's authority to3279reimburse up to 80 percent under its current program, API would support3280funding with the use of appropriated funds and coordinate with state-3281based resources to improve efficiencies in the inspection program.3282Criminalizing Pipeline Protests3283    As you testified at the hearing, you support criminal penalties for3284the unauthorized turning of valves on pipelines, which can present a3285safety risk. The Safe and Secure Transportation of American Energy Act3286goes further than unauthorized valve turning and would sentence3287individuals found to be ``disrupting or preventing the construction of3288pipelines.''32893290    Question 1. Do you think the Standing Rock protesters were3291disrupting or preventing the construction of the Dakota Access3292Pipeline?3293    Answer. Any vandalism, attacks on or damage to construction sites3294and other activities that disrupt service, inspection protocols and3295jurisdictional issues should be considered criminal and penalized3296accordingly. Vandalism or damage to construction sites or equipment and3297materials significantly increases the risk of harm to the pipeline and3298those operating at the facility. Importantly, this activity could also3299lead to an incident from damage caused by these events, potentially3300causing a safety hazard to the public and/or the environment. As such,3301this type of activity should be penalized criminally.33023303    Question 2. Do you think landowners and lawmakers fighting eminent3304domain for new carbon pipelines in South Dakota are preventing the3305construction of pipelines?3306    Answer. Most of the time, agreements over an easement can be3307reached voluntarily between the landowner and pipeline operator, with3308eminent domain only utilized as a last resort. For decades, eminent3309domain has and continues to be imperative to U.S. economic growth and3310critical infrastructure development, enabling the construction of3311highways, dams, airports, railroads, telephone, electricity lines and3312more. These projects have become the integrated infrastructure system3313Americans rely on daily to communicate with distant relatives, heat our3314homes, transport food, and provide clothing and other essential needs.3315    API supports two-way engagement between a pipeline operator and3316landowner, based on transparency, respect, reciprocity, inclusiveness,3317and accessibility. In 2024, API published the first edition of3318Recommended Practice 1185, Pipeline Public Engagement, in partnership3319with regulators and public stakeholders, to support operators creating3320long-term, meaningful, and durable community relationships on both3321planned and existing pipelines.33223323    Question 3. Do you support the Safe and Secure Transportation of3324American Energy Act, which could easily be interpreted as criminalizing3325protests and any other action that could be seen as disrupting or3326preventing construction?3327    Answer. API supports the criminalization of behavior that causes3328safety hazards to people and the environment, and the protection of3329critical facilities and equipment. The right to free speech and protest3330is one of the many foundational tenets that makes our country3331exceptional, and our position does not infringe on that foundational3332right. The Safe and Secure Transportation of American Energy Act3333clearly delineates lawful protest with criminal behavior that could3334damage a pipeline or lead to an incident.3335Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Safety3336    On the last day of the Biden administration, the Pipeline and3337Hazardous Materials Safety Administration proposed new safety3338requirements for Carbon Dioxide pipelines. However, the Trump3339administration has rescinded that proposal, continuing to leave3340communities vulnerable to incidents like the 2020 Sataria, Mississippi3341carbon dioxide leak that forced the evacuation of a town and3342hospitalized 40 people.33433344    Question 1. States like California and Illinois have banned new3345carbon pipelines until DOT issues safety requirements. Are you3346concerned that the delay of these requirements will prevent your3347members' ability to build new pipelines?3348    Answer. There are currently over 5,000 miles of pipeline that have3349been operating safely for decades under existing PHMSA regulations.3350Although API supports a review and potential update to current3351regulations, they have a long-standing proven track record in ensuring3352pipelines transporting CO2 are constructed and operated3353safely. Also, API expects to publish an industry consensus standard on3354the transportation of CO2 by pipeline later this year, which3355could be incorporated into PHMSA regulation by reference and strengthen3356the existing regulations with updates that further enhance the current3357regulatory framework for safe transportation of CO2 by3358pipeline.33593360    Question 2. Did you have concerns with the Biden administration's3361proposal? If so, what concerns did you have?3362    Answer. Yes, API does have concerns with the proposal as presented3363in the unofficial copy of the NPRM that was released by PHMSA in3364January 2025. While the NPRM included improvements to the regulations3365that API supports--conversions of service, fracture propagation and3366control, dispersion modeling, and other topic areas--several of the3367proposed changes are overreaching and some items were included in the3368proposal that do not relate to transportation of CO2 by3369pipeline and should be the subject of separate rulemaking. API expects3370to work with PHMSA pending any future rulemaking to address3371opportunities for improvement.3372                                 ______33733374   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to3375                              Robin Rorick3376Incomplete Regulations:3377    Question 1. There are at least six incomplete congressionally3378mandated regulations currently stalled at PHMSA, including on carbon3379dioxide pipelines, leak detection and repair, and liquefied natural3380gas. Do you think these rules--which you initially supported and, based3381on your testimony, continue to support--should be finalized?3382    Answer. API continues to support comprehensive, bipartisan efforts3383to help make our Nation's pipeline network safer as it provides3384reliable energy supply to every community in America. It is thus3385imperative that the regulatory environment remains cognizant of and3386responsive to both current and potential future safety challenges faced3387by operators. That said, API applauds PHMSA's efforts to date to3388advance regulatory reform and consider rulemakings that recognize the3389important role that leading industry practices, innovation and3390technology play in advancing safety including repair criteria and LNG3391safety. API would also support additional efforts by PHMSA to move3392forward with Congressionally mandated rulemakings, ensuring they are3393fit for purpose, meet the intent of Congress, and ultimately advance3394safety.3395Staffing:3396    Question 2. PHMSA has long been an underfunded agency, with not3397enough staff to properly ensure pipeline safety. Given the agency has3398just over a few hundred employees, even small cuts can have a3399significant impact. Given PHMSA's mission to protect people and the3400environment by advancing the safe transportation of energy and other3401hazardous materials, do you support enforceable staffing requirements3402for PHMSA to ensure the agency can keep communities safe?3403    Answer. Safety is our industry's top priority, and API agrees that3404PHMSA should be properly resourced with individuals with necessary3405levels of competency and knowledge of operations under their remit. In3406particular, a high-quality inspection workforce is critical in3407conducting ever more sophisticated inspections of performance-based3408regulations.3409Criminalization:3410    Question 3. Under existing law, it is already a felony to damage or3411destroy a pipeline. There are proposals to expand criminal penalties to3412``disrupting'' or ``preventing'' a pipeline. Do you agree3413``disrupting'' or ``preventing'' are too broad given the following3414examples?34153416    A. local landowner who refuses to sell farmland, ranchland, or3417private property to a pipeline company or opposes an eminent domain3418action count34193420    B. A concerned citizen speaking up at a local hearing in opposition3421to a pipeline34223423    C. An individual who writes an op-ed or posts on social media about3424their opposition to a pipeline34253426    D. A lawyer who files a lawsuit challenging a pipeline's permit or3427zoning approval34283429    E. A community member who reports environmental pollution or a3430hazardous waste spill to local authorities34313432    F. A pipeline employee who raises concerns about workplace safety34333434    Answer. Any vandalism, attacks on or damage to construction sites3435and other activities that disrupt service, inspection protocols and3436jurisdictional issues should be considered criminal and penalized3437accordingly. Easement negotiations, public hearings, media posts or3438safety reporting are lawful expressions of First Amendment rights to3439free speech, which API does not believe should be included in this3440provision. However, any vandalism or damage to construction sites or3441equipment could increase the risk of an incident that could, in turn,3442cause a safety hazard to the public, pipeline personnel or the3443environment, and this should be penalized criminally.3444    Most of the time, agreements over an easement can be reached3445voluntarily between the landowner and pipeline operator, with eminent3446domain only utilized as a last resort. For decades, eminent domain has3447and continues to be imperative to U.S. economic growth and critical3448infrastructure development, enabling the construction of highways,3449dams, airports, railroads, telephone, electricity lines and more. These3450projects have become the integrated infrastructure system Americans3451rely on daily to communicate with distant relatives, heat our homes,3452transport food, clothing and other essential needs.3453    API supports two-way engagement between a pipeline operator and3454landowner, based on transparency, respect, reciprocity, inclusiveness,3455and accessibility. In 2024, API published the first edition of3456Recommended Practice 1185, Pipeline Public Engagement, in partnership3457with regulators and public stakeholders, to support operators creating3458long-term, meaningful, and durable community relationships on both3459planned and existing pipelines.3460                                 ______34613462   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to3463                            Andrew J. Black3464PHMSA Inspector Resources3465    Not only does PHMSA need trained pipeline safety inspectors, but it3466needs engineers and scientists who understand how pipelines work. The3467result will be improved safety requirements and more oversight over the3468pipeline industry.34693470    Question 1. Do you believe PHMSA should be hiring additional3471experts?3472    Answer. Yes. Pipeline safety regulation is a technical field3473dependent on expertise and experience. Engineering or science3474backgrounds are needed to understand the physical and environmental3475stresses placed on pipelines. Additional PHMSA personnel expert in3476pipeline engineering with experience operating pipelines would benefit3477the quality and timeliness of PHMSA regulatory actions.34783479    Question 2. Federal pipeline safety officials' ability to make more3480money in the industry, how can we better retain and recruit these3481highly skilled employees?3482    Answer. PHMSA can attract and retain highly skilled employees with3483new authority to hire and compensate personnel at competitive levels.3484In the past, DOT personnel restrictions prevented PHMSA from hiring3485technical experts at higher GS levels. Congress can provide such3486authority directly to PHMSA. Congress can also provide authority to3487PHMSA directly, and not through the Office of Personnel Management, to3488compensate technical experts above the GS scale using mechanisms3489similar to those employed by DOJ or SEC for legal or financial3490employees.34913492    Question 3. States are currently only reimbursed for 55 percent of3493their pipeline inspection activities. Do you think Congress should3494provide increased funding for state inspectors?3495    Answer. LEPA does not have a position on state inspection3496reimbursement levels.3497Criminalizing Pipeline Protests3498    As you testified at the hearing, you support criminal penalties for3499the unauthorized turning of valves on pipelines, which can present a3500safety risk. The Safe and Secure Transportation of American Energy Act3501goes further than unauthorized valve turning and would sentence3502individuals found to be ``disrupting or preventing the construction of3503pipelines.''35043505    Question 1. Do you think the Standing Rock protesters were3506disrupting or preventing the construction of the Dakota Access3507Pipeline?3508    Answer. Multiple news outlets documented some Dakota Access3509construction protesters engaging in physical or violent activities such3510as blocking roadways, chaining persons to vehicles, setting fires,3511throwing objects at law enforcement or discharging firearms. Each of3512these activities fits within a definition of ``disrupting or3513preventing'' construction. To the extent the Senator feels there are3514peaceful, legal, First Amendment free speech activities that could fall3515under interpretations of ``disrupting or preventing'', LEPA is3516supportive of clarifying language.35173518    Question 2. Do you think landowners and lawmakers fighting eminent3519domain for new carbon pipelines in South Dakota are preventing the3520construction of pipelines?3521    Answer. A reasonable person could not interpret landowners and3522lawmakers fighting eminent domain through free speech, legislating or3523legal challenges as preventing construction of a pipeline.3524Additionally, no activity occurring during the planning, approval or3525permitting of a pipeline before its construction could reasonably be3526interpreted as preventing the construction of pipelines.35273528    Question 3. Do you support the Safe and Secure Transportation of3529American Energy Act, which could easily be interpreted as criminalizing3530protests and any other action that could be seen as disrupting or3531preventing construction?3532    Answer. LEPA supports the Safe and Secure Transportation of3533American Energy Act, which establishes that criminal penalties apply to3534``damaging, destroying, vandalizing, tampering with, disrupting the3535operation or construction of, or preventing the operation or3536construction'' of a pipeline. LEPA disagrees a reasonable person could3537easily interpret it as criminalizing protests, not least because3538peaceful protests are protected under the First Amendment to the U.S.3539Constitution. LEPA would oppose legislation that allows physical or3540violent protest of pipeline construction. To the extent the Senator3541feels the language of the bill could infringe on a citizen's right to3542protest peacefully, LEPA is supportive of making that clarification.3543                                 ______35443545   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to3546                            Andrew J. Black3547Artificial Intelligence & Pipeline Safety3548    It is critical that we explore every avenue to reduce potential3549risks and prevent future pipeline failures. One way of doing this is3550through the improvement and adoption of technology. You mentioned in3551your testimony that you are employing artificial intelligence in3552pipeline maintenance and safety.35533554    Question 1. How is AI currently being employed with pipelines?3555    Answer. Pipeline operators are currently using artificial3556intelligence to detect leaks. Examples include using AI to monitor3557cameras at facilities to detect equipment failures that result in a3558leak. Operators are also using AI to scan imaging collected from aerial3559surveillance to detect signs of a pipeline leak or encroachment on a3560pipeline right of way that may present a hazard. LEPA would welcome the3561Senator's support of provisions to ensure pipeline operators can fully3562leverage advanced technology, including AI, to improve pipeline safety.3563Examples include clarifying that pipeline operators can use drones and3564satellites to monitor their rights of way and reauthorizing the3565technology pilot program to demonstrate the effectiveness of new3566technologies.35673568    Question 2. How else might this technology be used to enhance3569pipeline safety in the future?3570    Answer. Pipeline operators are exploring the use of machine3571learning and artificial intelligence to improve pipeline safety.3572Pipeline operators collect a tremendous amount of data from their3573operations and inspection technology. Machine learning has the3574potential to detect signs of a potential problem otherwise3575imperceptible to current techniques. For example, pipeline operators3576hope to use machine learning to sift through operations data on flow3577rate, pipeline pressure, valve status and pump status to detect the3578signals or signs of small leaks otherwise imperceptible through3579pressure drops or flow changes. Pipeline operators also hope to sift3580through inline inspection tools that generate terabytes of data as they3581scan pipe walls to detect signs of corrosion or cracking earlier than3582currently possible. LEPA would welcome the Senator's support of PHMSA3583research and development in these areas.3584                                 ______35853586   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to3587                            Andrew J. Black3588Incomplete Regulations:3589    Question 1. There are at least six incomplete congressionally3590mandated regulations currently stalled at PHMSA, including on carbon3591dioxide pipelines, leak detection and repair, and liquefied natural3592gas. Do you think these rules--which you initially supported and, based3593on your testimony, continue to support--should be finalized?3594    Answer. LEPA supports the proposal and finalization of a rulemaking3595that provides targeted updates to PHMSA's CO2 pipeline3596regulations. LEPA does not have positions on the methane monitoring and3597mitigation rule or LNG rule, which are outside the scope of LEPA.3598Staffing:3599    Question 2. PHMSA has long been an underfunded agency, with not3600enough staff to properly ensure pipeline safety. Given the agency has3601just over a few hundred employees, even small cuts can have a3602significant impact. Given PHMSA's mission to protect people and the3603environment by advancing the safe transportation of energy and other3604hazardous materials, do you support enforceable staffing requirements3605for PHMSA to ensure the agency can keep communities safe?3606    Answer. LEPA supports PHMSA having the staff necessary to fulfill3607its pipeline safety mission. More important than the number of PHMSA3608staff is the qualifications of its staff. Pipeline safety regulation is3609a technical field dependent on expertise and experience.3610    Engineering or science backgrounds are needed to understand the3611physical and environmental stresses placed on pipelines. Additional3612PHMSA personnel expert in pipeline engineering with experience3613operating pipelines would benefit the quality and timeliness of PHMSA3614regulatory and enforcement actions.3615    PHMSA can attract and retain highly skilled employees with new3616authority to hire and compensate personnel at competitive levels. In3617the past, DOT personnel restrictions prevented PHMSA from hiring3618technical experts at higher GS levels. Congress can provide such3619authority directly to PHMSA. Congress can also provide authority to3620PHMSA directly, and not through the Office of Personnel Management, to3621compensate technical experts above the GS scale using mechanisms3622similar to those employed by DOJ or SEC for legal or financial3623employees.3624Criminalization:3625    Question 3. Under existing law, it is already a felony to damage or3626destroy a pipeline. There are proposals to expand criminal penalties to3627``disrupting'' or ``preventing'' a pipeline. Do you agree3628``disrupting'' or ``preventing'' are too broad given the following3629examples?36303631    A: A local landowner who refuses to sell farmland, ranchland, or3632private property to a pipeline company or opposes an eminent domain3633action count36343635    B: A concerned citizen speaking up at a local hearing in opposition3636to a pipeline36373638    C: An individual who writes an op-ed or posts on social media about3639their opposition to a pipeline36403641    D: A lawyer who files a lawsuit challenging a pipeline's permit or3642zoning approval36433644    E: A community member who reports environmental pollution or a3645hazardous waste spill to local authorities36463647    F: A pipeline employee who raises concerns about workplace safety3648    Answer. Pipeline protests at operating facilities or construction3649sites have included protesters engaging in physical or violent3650activities such as blocking roadways, chaining persons to facilities or3651vehicles, setting fires, throwing objects at law enforcement or3652discharging firearms. Each of these activities fits within a definition3653of ``disrupting or preventing'' construction.3654    A reasonable person could not interpret concerned citizens,3655landowners and lawmakers opposing or protesting a pipeline through free3656speech, legislating or legal challenges as disrupting or preventing3657construction of a pipeline. Additionally, no activity occurring during3658the planning, approval or permitting of a pipeline before its3659construction could reasonably be interpreted as preventing the3660construction of pipelines. Likewise, no reasonable person would3661consider a whistle-blower in good faith reporting a safety concern as3662disrupting or preventing construction.3663    To the extent the Senator feels there are peaceful, legal, First3664Amendment free speech activities that still could fall under3665interpretations of ``disrupting or preventing'', LEPA is supportive of3666clarifying language.3667                                 ______36683669     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to3670                             Richard Leger3671Safe Digging3672    I recently introduced a resolution designating April as National3673Safe Digging Month, to build awareness of safe digging practices that3674protect homeowners and utility workers from damaging underground3675utility lines during excavation projects. Excavation damage to3676underground infrastructure, not only pipelines but other critical3677systems like water and broadband, is both dangerous and costly. The One3678Call/811 system was created to prevent that damage by connecting3679excavators with underground utilities before digging. Yet since then,368081 percent of excavation damage incidents involving pipelines have been3681caused by third party excavators. Even with PHMSA's 2015 final rule3682intended to evaluate state 811 programs and enforce minimum Federal3683standards, significant excavation related incidents continue to occur.36843685    Question 1. Mr. Leger, given these persistent risks and need for3686consistent enforcement, what should be done to strengthen the One Call/3687811 program and ensure states are effectively preventing excavation3688damage across all underground utilities?3689    Answer. A regulatory framework for incentivizing prevention of3690excavation damage already exists in the Code of Federal Regulations (493691CFR 198--Regulations for Grants to Aid State Pipeline Safety Programs).3692    Congress should direct PHMSA to amend Part 198 to update State One3693Call program requirements (Sec. 198.37), enhance damage prevention3694program effectiveness criteria (Sec. 198.55), and require recipients of3695One Call grants (Sec. 198.35) to implement the best practices of3696effective One Call programs identified in the 2023 AGA white paper3697Working with Other Stakeholders to Advance Pipeline Safety in Damage3698Prevention. Effective state One-Call program elements include:36993700   1)  Size/scope of One-Call ticket requirements (i.e., min/max) for3701        standard infrastructure locate requests (possible process3702        exceptions for special large project tickets)37033704   2)  Longevity of One Call ticket requirements (i.e., min/max) for3705        standard locate requests (possible process exceptions for3706        special Large Project Tickets)37073708   3)  Tolerance (hand-dig only) zone horizontal dimension requirements37093710   4)  Tolerance zone requirements37113712   5)  Emergency excavation notification requirements37133714   6)  Excavator responsibilities explained37153716   7)  Definitions of ``excavator''/''excavation''37173718   8)  White-lining requirements37193720   9)  Positive response requirements37213722  10)  Locatability of newly installed underground facilities37233724  11)  Sewer line marking requirements37253726  12)  Effective, active, meaningful enforcement of state dig laws37273728  13)  Specific qualifications/requirements for excavators performing3729        trenchless excavation activities that are not subject to3730        pipeline construction requirements in 49 CFR 192/19537313732    Legislative language that sought to codify these recommended3733excavation damage prevention best practices was included in H.R. 6494,3734the Promoting Innovation in Pipeline Efficiency and Safety Act of 20233735(Section 18) and H.R. 7655, the Pipeline Safety, Modernization, and3736Expansion Act of 2024 (Section 15), pipeline safety bills that passed3737the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and Energy and3738Commerce Committees respectively, last Congress. In the 119th Congress,3739we look forward to working with the Senate Commerce Committee, as well3740as your House counterparts, to ensure that common sense and critical3741excavation damage prevention provisions become law.37423743    Question 2. Mr. Leger, as an operator across several states, what3744challenges do you face in working with different state 811 programs,3745and what policy changes would help reduce excavation damage across your3746service areas?3747    Answer. CenterPoint Energy has firsthand experience with the3748various maturities of state programs in the areas in which it operates.3749CenterPoint reaffirms the necessity for One Call (Dial 811) programs to3750have a prescriptive framework of core program requirements, ticket3751scope/longevity, and excavator accountability. CenterPoint Energy's3752exposure to multiple state programs provides us an opportunity to3753attest that those programs with equal excavator accountability3754typically experience lower rates of damage to pipelines.3755                                 ______37563757   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to3758                             Richard Leger3759PHMSA Inspector Resources3760    Not only does PHMSA need trained pipeline safety inspectors, but it3761needs engineers and scientists who understand how pipelines work. The3762result will be improved safety requirements and more oversight over the3763pipeline industry.37643765    Quesstion 1. Do you believe PHMSA should be hiring additional3766experts?3767    Answer. While AGA supports a properly staffed and capable regulator3768in PHMSA, natural gas distribution pipeline operations in the United3769States are primarily overseen by state-level pipeline safety programs,3770and not directly by PHMSA inspectors. States account for about 753771percent of all pipeline safety inspectors in the country and, as state3772regulated entities, natural gas utilities support appropriate staffing3773of these state programs because they are critical partners in public3774safety and energy infrastructure reliability.37753776    Question 2. Federal pipeline safety officials' ability to make more3777money in the industry, how can we better retain and recruit these3778highly skilled employees?3779    Answer. AGA and AGA member utilities maintain a long-term positive,3780productive and technically capable partnership with our Federal3781pipeline safety partners at PHMSA. While we have very little insight on3782the Federal government's ability to recruit and retain talent, we urge3783Congress to provide PHMSA with the resources and personnel necessary to3784provide effective pipeline safety oversight.37853786    Question 3. States are currently only reimbursed for 55 percent of3787their pipeline inspection activities. Do you think Congress should3788provide increased funding for state inspectors?3789    Answer. As AGA members are primarily state regulated entities, AGA3790and AGA members do not take a position on specific Federal funding for3791state pipeline safety activities and personnel beyond ensuring that3792combined state and Federal funding is sufficient for states to operate3793successful safety programs.3794    With regard specifically to state excavation damage programs (i.e.,3795Dial-811 or ``call before you dig'' programs), AGA believes it is3796appropriate that Federal funding be contingent on the effectiveness of3797those programs. 49 CFR Sec. 198 provides a reasonable framework for3798conditioning grants to state pipeline safety programs. We believe3799Congress should direct PHMSA to amend Part 198 to update State One Call3800program requirements (Sec. 198.37), enhance damage prevention program3801effectiveness criteria (Sec. 198.55), and require recipients of One3802Call grants (Sec. 198.35) to implement the elements of effective One3803Call programs identified in the 2023 AGA white paper Working with Other3804Stakeholders to Advance Pipeline Safety in Damage Prevention. These3805elements include:38063807   1)  Size/scope of One-Call ticket requirements (i.e., min/max) for3808        standard infrastructure locate requests (possible process3809        exceptions for special large project tickets)38103811   2)  Longevity of One Call ticket requirements (i.e., min/max) for3812        standard locate requests (possible process exceptions for3813        special Large Project Tickets)38143815   3)  Tolerance (hand-dig only) zone horizontal dimension requirements38163817   4)  Tolerance zone requirements38183819   5)  Emergency excavation notification requirements38203821   6)  Excavator responsibilities explained38223823   7)  Definitions of ``excavator''/''excavation''38243825   8)  White-lining requirements38263827   9)  Positive response requirements38283829  10)  Locatability of newly-installed underground facilities38303831  11)  Sewer line marking requirements38323833  12)  Effective, active, meaningful enforcement of state dig laws38343835  13)  Specific qualifications/requirements for excavators performing3836        trenchless excavation activities that are not subject to3837        pipeline construction requirements in 49 CFR 192/19538383839    Legislative language that sought to codify these recommended3840excavation damage prevention best practices was included in H.R. 6494,3841the Promoting Innovation in Pipeline Efficiency and Safety Act of 20233842(Section 18) and H.R. 7655, the Pipeline Safety, Modernization, and3843Expansion Act of 2024 (Section 15), pipeline safety bills that passed3844the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and Energy and3845Commerce Committees respectively, last Congress. In the 119th Congress,3846we look forward to working with the Senate Commerce Committee, as well3847as your House counterparts, to ensure that common sense and critical3848excavation damage prevention provisions become law.3849Criminalizing Pipeline Protests3850    As you testified at the hearing, you support criminal penalties for3851the unauthorized turning of valves on pipelines, which can present a3852safety risk. The Safe and Secure Transportation of American Energy Act3853goes further than unauthorized valve turning and would sentence3854individuals found to be ``disrupting or preventing the construction of3855pipelines.''38563857    Question 1. Do you think the Standing Rock protestors were3858disrupting or preventing the construction of the Dakota Access3859Pipeline?3860    Answer. The Dakota Access pipeline is an upstream pipeline that3861transports crude oil. AGA member company natural gas utilities were not3862involved in the planning or construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline3863and do not receive any product from it currently. As such, we do not3864have any relevant experience to share about how the pipeline was3865planned and built and what impact any protests had on that process.38663867    Question 2. Do you think that landowners and lawmakers fighting3868eminent domain for new carbon pipelines in South Dakota are preventing3869the construction of pipelines?3870    Answer. AGA member natural gas utilities do not plan, permit,3871construct or operate CO2 pipelines. As such, we do not have3872any relevant experience to share about how upstream oil and refined3873product pipeline companies pursue building CO2 pipelines or3874the related eminent domain challenges they may face as part of the3875process.38763877    Question 3. Do you support the Safe and Secure Transportation of3878American Energy Act, which could easily be interpreted as criminalizing3879protests and any other action that could be seen as disrupting or3880preventing construction?3881    Answer. Broadly speaking, pipeline construction involves highly3882technical and controlled activities. Uninterrupted and timely execution3883of construction tasks is vital to ensuring the safe operation of a3884pipeline, and requires skilled labor and appropriate worker3885qualification, reliable operation of construction equipment and,3886importantly, a safe and secure working environment. Disrupting or3887interfering with this process can have grave consequences on worker and3888public safety, both during construction and during future operations.3889    More specifically, the Safe and Secure Transportation of American3890Energy Act has limited application to local natural gas utilities. In3891short, the legislation, would increase criminal penalties on those who3892knowingly and willfully damage, destroy, vandalize, tamper with,3893disrupt or prevent the construction of or operation of interstate3894pipelines or intrastate pipelines engaged in interstate or foreign3895commerce. AGA member natural gas utilities do not operate interstate3896natural gas pipelines and those intrastate gas pipelines our companies3897do operate are intended to serve in-state natural gas utility3898customers.3899    While the Safe and Secure Transportation of American Energy Act has3900limited applicability for natural gas utilities, AGA notes that3901criminal attacks on natural gas utility property, equipment and3902facilities continue to occur. These activities are not only hazardous3903to public safety and utility company employees, they threaten an LDC's3904ability to deliver natural gas to thousands of homes, government and3905military facilities, and other critical infrastructure customers. AGA3906supports increased criminal penalties on individuals who intentionally3907damage, destroy or impair pipelines and pipeline facilities, or disrupt3908their safe operation, including those under construction.3909                                 ______39103911   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to3912                             Richard Leger3913Updating Aging Pipeline Infrastructure3914    The use of aging cast iron pipes presents a safety risk in the3915transport of natural gas. You mention in your testimony that3916CenterPoint is on track to eliminate cast iron and bare steel from its3917system by the end of 2026.39183919    Question 1. Can you expand on how CenterPoint has been able to make3920progress modernizing its systems?3921    Answer. CenterPoint Energy uses probabilistic modeling to help3922evaluate risk associated with different types of assets and assist with3923prioritizing our modernization efforts. Using this risk-based approach,3924we develop replacement programs with dedicated timelines and discuss3925them with our regulators so they are aware of our intent and3926prioritization of modernization of our system. Because these3927replacement programs are capital-intensive and require upfront3928investment by the utilities, having efficient rate recovery mechanisms3929and constructive regulatory relationships support the ability of the3930utilities to proactively modernize their systems.39313932    Question 2. How can we ensure other companies modernize their3933pipelines quickly and safely?3934    Answer. It would be ideal if states, counties and local3935municipalities can respond in a timely fashion and grant permits to3936utilities so that they can perform the work necessary in the public3937right of way, with the least amount of disruption possible to the local3938community. Additionally, effective rate recovery mechanisms can aid in3939facilitating the replacement of legacy infrastructure such as cast iron3940and bare steel pipelines.3941                                 ______39423943   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Edward Markey to3944                             Richard Leger3945Incomplete Regulations:3946    Question 1. There are at least six incomplete congressionally3947mandated regulations currently stalled at PHMSA, including on carbon3948dioxide pipelines, leak detection and repair, and liquefied natural3949gas. Do you think these rules--which you initially supported and, based3950on your testimony, continue to support--should be finalized?3951    Answer. Generally speaking, AGA continues to believe that PHMSA3952should work expeditiously to fulfill Congress's existing regulatory3953mandates. Specifically, AGA and its members are looking forward to3954continuing our work with PHMSA on finalizing a leak detection and3955repair rule that is reasonable, technically feasible, and consistent3956with the plain language and intent of Section 113 of the PIPES Act of39572020. Additionally, AGA members support PHMSA's efforts to finalize3958critical updates to modernize 49 U.S.C. part 193, pertaining to3959liquified natural gas. We note that PHMSA has recently issued an3960Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding reforms to part 1933961and we look forward to supporting PHMSA on this rulemaking process by3962providing feedback that leads to a risk-based regulatory approach for3963LNG facilities.3964Staffing:3965    Question 2. PHMSA has long been an underfunded agency, with not3966enough staff to properly ensure pipeline safety. Given the agency has3967just over a few hundred employees, even small cuts can have a3968significant impact. Given PHMSA's mission to protect people and the3969environment by advancing the safe transportation of energy and other3970hazardous materials, do you support enforceable staffing requirements3971for PHMSA to ensure the agency can keep communities safe?3972    Answer. As AGA members are primarily state regulated entities, AGA3973does not take a position on specific PHMSA budgeting and personnel3974matters beyond ensuring that combined state and Federal funding is3975sufficient for states to operate successful pipeline safety programs.3976While AGA supports a properly staffed and capable regulator in PHMSA,3977natural gas distribution pipeline operations in the United States are3978primarily overseen by state-level pipeline safety programs, and not3979directly by PHMSA inspectors. States account for about 75 percent of3980all pipeline safety inspectors in the country, and, as state regulated3981entities, natural gas utilities support appropriate staffing of these3982state programs because they are critical partners in helping keep our3983infrastructure and our customers safe.3984Criminalization:3985    Question 3. Under existing law, it is already a felony to damage or3986destroy a pipeline. There are proposals to expand criminal penalties to3987``disrupting'' or ``preventing'' a pipeline. Do you agree3988``disrupting'' or ``preventing'' are too broad given the following3989examples?39903991    A: A local landowner who refuses to sell farmland, ranchland, or3992private property to a pipeline company or opposes an eminent domain3993action count39943995    B: A concerned citizen speaking up at a local hearing in opposition3996to a pipeline39973998    C: An individual who writes an op-ed or posts on social media about3999their opposition to a pipeline40004001    D: A lawyer who files a lawsuit challenging a pipeline's permit or4002zoning approval40034004    E: A community member who reports environmental pollution or a4005hazardous waste spill to local authorities40064007    F: A pipeline employee who raises concerns about workplace safety4008    Answer. AGA respectfully suggests that the examples given reflect4009common, constitutionally protected activities that landowners, impacted4010citizens, and activists may engage in to oppose pipeline use and4011pipeline construction. None of these examples directly disrupt or4012prevent safe pipeline operations, including construction or4013maintenance. Activities that physically damage pipelines or prevent4014access to pipeline infrastructure or facilities can prevent gas4015utilities from running safe pipeline construction and maintenance4016operations and prevent operators from performing critical safety4017functions such as leak detection and repair and emergency gas leak4018response. Gas utilities operate 2.3 million miles of local distribution4019pipelines providing service to more than 189 million Americans.4020Physical disruption to the construction, operations, or maintenance of4021pipelines or pipeline or pipeline facilities, may threaten the safety4022of the public and pipeline workers, both at the time of the act and4023during future operations.4024    Unfortunately, criminal attacks on natural gas utility property,4025equipment, and facilities continue to occur. These activities are not4026only hazardous to public safety and gas utility company employees, they4027can also threaten natural gas local distribution companies' ability to4028deliver natural gas to thousands of homes, government and military4029facilities, and other critical infrastructure customers. AGA supports4030increased criminal penalties on bad actors who intentionally damage,4031destroy or impair pipelines and pipeline facilities, or disrupt their4032safe operation, including those under construction.4033                                 ______40344035   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to4036                               Bill Caram4037PHMSA Inspector Resources4038    Not only does PHMSA need trained pipeline safety inspectors, but it4039needs engineers and scientists who understand how pipelines work. The4040result will be improved safety requirements and more oversight over the4041pipeline industry.40424043    Question 1. Do you believe PHMSA should be hiring additional4044experts?4045    Answer. PHMSA urgently needs to hire additional experts in several4046areas across the agency, including inspectors, engineers, scientists,4047and other professionals. First, as evidenced by the recent Advanced4048Notice of Proposed Rulemakings, PHMSA is seeking stakeholder input on4049cost of compliance to facilitate rulemaking efforts. PHMSA needs more4050economists on the standards and rulemaking team to independently4051produce this information. Relying on the industry it regulates to4052provide this information, when they have a clear interest in the4053results of the process, is problematic.4054    Second, PHMSA just experienced a talent drain because of Reductions4055in Force efforts. We don't know the full impact yet, but we do know4056that these reductions hit two areas particularly hard. One is the4057Community Liaison program, PHMSA's public engagement department. Based4058on PHMSA's website, this department went from 10 before the reductions4059in force\1\ to three.\2\ The service area for these Community Liaisons4060is the entire country and there are three people, including the Program4061Manager. This dramatic reduction compromises PHMSA's ability to engage4062with communities, particularly around incidents and emergency response.4063Another area hit particularly hard is PHMSA leadership. Though not4064officially announced, as far as we know, two of the top three leaders4065at PHMSA's Office of Pipeline Safety have left. Other senior leaders4066whose roles supported the Office of Pipeline Safety have also retired.4067PHMSA needs to be hiring to backfill positions and develop future4068leaders.4069---------------------------------------------------------------------------4070    \1\ https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2024-03/4071PHP-Org-Chart-March-24-2024.pdf4072    \2\ https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/cats.htm4073---------------------------------------------------------------------------4074    Finally, Congress has incentivized a buildout of non-hydrocarbon4075pipelines such as carbon dioxide and hydrogen. While some mileage of4076these types of pipelines currently exists, they are relatively rare and4077rural. These products possess unique properties and pose unique risks4078compared to hydrocarbon pipelines and require specialists, including4079engineers and scientists, to modernize regulations, drive productive4080research and development, conduct effective inspections, and issue4081meaningful enforcement.40824083    Question 2. Federal pipeline safety officials' ability to make more4084money in the industry, how can we better retain and recruit these4085highly skilled employees?4086    Answer. Pipeline Safety Trust agrees that compensation is one of4087the most important methods for retaining and attracting talented4088employees. While compensation is crucial, PHMSA also faces competition4089from industry in terms of career advancement opportunities and4090resources. However, pay flexibility would be the most immediate and4091impactful step Congress could take. We encourage Congress to authorize4092the Secretary, in Section 60101 of title 49, the ability to establish4093higher rates of pay for the employees of PHMSA. One way of achieving4094this would be to mirror the language used in the Consolidated4095Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-74, 125 Stat. 1012) for the4096employees of the Department of the Interior in the applicable job4097series described in the subsection. Additionally, Congress could carve4098out flexibility for the administration such as allowing up to 304099percent, for example, above the rate of pay normally scheduled for the4100applicable employee.41014102    Question 3. States are currently only reimbursed for 55 percent of4103their pipeline inspection activities. Do you think Congress should4104provide increased funding for state inspectors?4105    Answer. State programs carry out inspections on more than 854106percent of the Nation's pipeline system. They are beyond critical to4107pipeline safety. The last numbers we have (2023) show Federal funds4108only reimbursing less than 55 percent of state program activities, even4109though PHMSA has the authority to reimburse up to 80 percent.4110Underfunded state programs can create inspection and enforcement gaps4111that directly impact public safety. Congress has not authorized or4112appropriated PHMSA enough resources to cover its fair share of state4113program funding, and the program has not been fully appropriated.4114However, last fall, Congress made a big step towards properly funding4115these programs with a large increase in appropriations. Even with this4116large increase, PHMSA will still fall short of meeting the 80 percent4117target. On top of this, state programs are facing many of the same4118issues that face PHMSA. Many states are seeing an expansion of4119authority with gathering lines coming under regulations for the first4120time and a potential buildout of carbon dioxide and hydrogen pipelines.4121State programs also face similar recruitment and retention issues with4122the pipeline industry often offering employees more money. Congress4123must provide more funding to state programs to make a meaningful4124difference in pipeline safety.41254126                               [all]