The Library of Congress  >  THOMAS Home  >  Committee Reports  >  Search Results

31-260

109TH CONGRESS

Rept. 109-717

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

2d Session

Part 2

--PIPELINE SAFETY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2006

December 5, 2006- Ordered to be printed

Mr. BARTON of Texas, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H.R. 5782]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

CONTENTS Page
Amendment 2
Purpose and Summary 7
Background and Need for Legislation 7
Hearings 9
Committee Consideration 9
Committee Votes 9
Committee Oversight Findings 10
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives 10
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures 10
Earmark 10
Committee Cost Estimate 10
Congressional Budget Office Estimate 10
Federal Mandates Statement 14
Advisory Committee Statement 14
Constitutional Authority Statement 14
Applicability to Legislative Branch 14
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation 14
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported 18

AMENDMENT

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Sec. 1. Short title; amendment of title 49, United States Code; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Pipeline safety and damage prevention.
Sec. 3. Distribution integrity management program rulemaking deadline.
Sec. 4. Authorization of appropriations.

SEC. 2. PIPELINE SAFETY AND DAMAGE PREVENTION.

`Sec. 60134. State damage prevention programs

`60134. State damage prevention programs.'.

`Sec. 6109. Public education and awareness

`6109. Public education and awareness.'.

`Sec. 60135. Enforcement transparency

`60135. Enforcement transparency.'.

SEC. 3. DISTRIBUTION INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM RULEMAKING DEADLINE.

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

SEC. 5. INCIDENT REPORTING.

`Sec. 60136. Incident reporting

`60136. Incident reporting.'.

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

The purpose of H.R. 5782 is to reauthorize the pipeline safety laws, Subtitle VIII of Title 49, U.S.C. and to provide for new authorities.

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Nearly half a million miles of crude oil, petroleum product, and natural gas transmission pipelines cross the United States. These pipelines feed critical infrastructure, such as power plants, airports, and military bases. While an efficient and fundamentally safe means of transport, many pipelines carry volatile or flammable material, with the potential, if not managed safely, to cause public injury and environmental damage.

The Department of Transportation (DOT) is the lead Federal regulator of pipeline safety. DOT administers pipeline regulations through the Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) within the Pipelines and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA). The Transportation Security Administration at the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for security (P.L. 107-71 transferred pipeline security from OPS to TSA, and P.L. 107-296 transferred TSA from DOT to DHS).

The Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (the Act) improved pipeline safety and provided for pipeline safety education programs. Authorizations for programs that fall under the Act expire in 2006. The Committee notes that PHMSA has made progress in achieving every mandate set forth in the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act (PSIA) of 2002, and the agency has done so in a timely manner. Over the past five years, the agency has responded positively to 46 NTSB safety recommendations and is working to close the three recommendations remaining from the pre-2002 environment. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently closed eight pipeline safety recommendations; six in enforcement, and two in research and development. However, challenges still remain and improvements can be made to the pipeline safety program.

When comparing the years 2001-2005 to the previous five-year period of 1996-2000, the rate of hazardous liquid pipeline accidents has declined by 18 percent. In addition, by 2005 the volume of significant oil spills decreased by 34 percent from the previous 10 year average, and the 10-year average volume of net spills for the same period decreased 36 percent. While much advancement has been made, concerns about other causes of pipeline accidents and damage continue to exist. Urbanization of previously rural areas is placing people closer to pipelines. Expansion and development also means more construction activity near pipelines. It should come as no surprise therefore, that third party excavation damage is a leading cause of pipeline accidents. To address the increasing risks associated with the damage prevention process, this legislation seeks to encourage the States to adopt and enforce more stringent procedures for all parties involved in the process. The State programs authorized under this legislation require excavators to use a one call notification system to identify pipelines marked before construction activity begins and also requires pipeline operators to follow through and take reasonable steps to mark their pipelines upon notice of excavation activity. In addition, the language contains a requirement to call 911 if any damage results to a pipeline from construction or excavation activity that causes a release of toxic, flammable or corrosive gas or liquid.

In addition, on March 2, 2006, a leak was discovered on a BP oil transit line in Prudhoe Bay, on Alaska's North Slope. The spill was estimated at 250,000 gallons making it the largest spill in the history of North Slope oil production. The Department of Transportation issued a Corrective Action Order (CAO) which required the operator to inspect the line that failed, as well as several others. In August of this year anomalies found in these lines as a result of the required testing resulted in the temporary shut-in of America's largest producing oil field or approximately 8 percent of domestic production.

While the DOT reacted quickly by issuing a CAO bringing these lines under their jurisdiction, prior to the spill the lines were unregulated by the Federal government because they operated at low internal stress. Historically, low-stress lines have been assumed to be low-risk lines due to the lower pressure at which they operate. However, there has been a gradual understanding since an accident in 1990 that the regulatory gap that has existed for low-stress lines needed to be closed and this bill accomplishes that objective.

Another area of pipeline safety regulation that needed attention was the transparency of DOT's enforcement actions against operators. The Committee has had a longstanding concern that the DOT's enforcement actions were not well understood or resulted in a complete accounting of

the fines and penalties proposed and collected. These concerns were substantiated by a GAO study released in July 2004. While the GAO declared in hearings before the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality that the DOT's enforcement performance had improved, the Committee continues to monitor the situation and has included a provision in the bill on enforcement transparency that will hopefully provide timely and accurate information on enforcement proceedings to all interested parties.

HEARINGS

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held two hearings on pipeline safety laws in the 109th Congress. The first hearing, `Pipeline Safety: A Progress Report since the Enactment of the Pipeline Safety Act of 2002' was held on April 27, 2006. The Subcommittee received testimony from Stacy L. Gerard, Acting Administrator/Chief Safety Officer, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation; Theodore Alves, Principal Assistant Inspector General for Audit and Evaluation, Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Transportation; Robert Chipkevich, Director, Office of Railroad, Pipeline, and Hazardous Materials Investigations, National Transportation Safety Board; Katherine Siggerud, Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office; The Honorable Donald L. Mason, Commissioner, Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, on behalf of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners; Massoud Tahamtani, Director, Division of Utility and Railroad Safety, Virginia State Corporation Commission, on behalf of the National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives; Edmund F. Bender Jr., Vice President, Gas Distribution and New Business Division, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, on behalf of the American Gas Association; Jeryl L. Mohn, Senior Vice President, Operations and Engineering, Panhandle Energy, on behalf of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America; Timothy C. Felt, President and CEO, Explorer Pipeline Company, on behalf of the Association of Oil Pipe Lines; Lois N. Epstein P.E., Senior Engineer, Oil and Gas Industry Specialist, Cook Inlet Keeper, on behalf of the Pipeline Safety Trust; and Bob Kipp, President, Common Ground Alliance.

The second hearing, `Discussion Draft on the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2006 and H.R. 5782' was held on July 27, 2006. The Subcommittee received testimony from the Honorable Thomas J. Barrett, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation; the Honorable Donald L. Mason, Commissioner, Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, on behalf of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners; Ronald W. Jibson, Vice President, Operations, Questar Gas, on behalf of the American Gas Association; Jeryl L. Mohn, Senior Vice President, Operations and Engineering, Panhandle Energy, on behalf of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America; Timothy C. Felt, President and CEO, Explorer Pipeline Company, on behalf of the Association of Oil Pipe Lines; Lois N. Epstein P.E., Senior Engineer, Oil and Gas Industry Specialist, Cook Inlet Keeper.

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On September 27, 2006, the Committee on Energy and Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 5782 favorably reported to the House, amended, by a voice vote, a quorum being present.

COMMITTEE VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. There were no record votes taken in connection with ordering H.R. 5782 reported. A motion by Mr. Barton to order H.R. 5782 favorably reported to the House, amended, was agreed to by a voice vote.

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee held a legislative and oversight hearings and made findings that are reflected in this report.

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The goal of H.R. 5782 is to reauthorize the pipeline safety laws, Subtitle VII of Title 49, U.S.C., and provides for new authorities.

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that H.R. 5782, the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2006, would result in no new or increased budget authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or revenues.

EARMARK

In compliance with H. Res. 1000 as passed the House of Representatives on September 14, 2006, the Committee finds that H.R. 5782, the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2006, contains no earmarks.

COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the following is the cost estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

November 9, 2006.

Hon. JOE BARTON,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 5782, the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2006.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Gregory Waring (for federal costs), Sarah Puro (for the state and local impact), and Fatimot Ladipo (for the private-sector impact).

Sincerely,

Donald B. Marron,

Acting Director.

Enclosure.

H.R. 5782--Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2006

Summary: The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) within the Department of Transportation (DOT) oversees the safety of pipelines that transport gas or hazardous liquids and provides grants to states for programs to ensure pipeline safety. For these activities, H.R. 5782 would authorize gross appropriations of about $330 million over the 2007-2010 period. Under the bill, about $253 million of those appropriations would be offset by the collection of fees paid by pipeline operators over the four-year period. In addition, CBO estimates that the bill would authorize PHMSA to collect almost $5 million over the 2007-2010 period to recover its costs of conducting pipeline design reviews. The agency would be authorized to spend these collections over the 2007-2011 period for its pipeline safety activities, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.

The bill also would authorize the appropriation of $24 million over the 2007-2010 period for PHMSA to provide grants to local governments for emergency management and would authorize the appropriations of $11 million over the same period for grants to state programs that help excavators coordinate their work with the operators of underground pipelines, grants to local communities to improve pipeline safety, technical assistance, and public awareness. Finally, CBO estimates that preparing certain studies and rules required by the bill would cost about $1 million over the 2007-2011 period.

CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 5782 would have a net cost of $98 million over the 2007-2011 period. Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending and would have an insignificant effect on revenues.

H.R. 5782 contain intergovernmental mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). CBO estimates that the aggregate costs to state, local, and tribal governments, while uncertain, likely would not exceed the threshold established in UMRA ($64 million in 2006, adjusted annually for inflation).

H.R. 5782 contains private-sector mandates, as defined in UMRA, on operators of distribution and transmission pipelines for natural gas or liquids by increasing user fees, authorizing a new fee, and imposing new safety standards. Since some of the mandates in the bill would require the Department of Transportation to prescribe new safety standards for which information currently is not available, CBO cannot determine the direct costs of complying with all of the mandates in the bill or whether the total costs would exceed the annual threshold established by UMRA ($128 million for private-sector mandates in 2006, adjusted annually for inflation).

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 5782 is shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 400 (transportation). 



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                            By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--                     


                                                                                2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION                                                                        


Pipeline Safety Spending Under Current Law:                                                              


Estimated Net Budget Authority                                                     0    0    0    0    0 


Estimated Outlays                                                                 34   10    2    0    0 


Proposed Changes: 1                                                                                      


Estimated Net Authorization Level                                                 29   28   28   29    0 


Estimated Net Outlays                                                            -15   15   23   26   49 


Pipeline Safety Spending Under H.R. 5782:                                                                


Estimated Authorization Level                                                     29   28   28   29    0 


Estimated Outlays                                                                 19   25   25   26   49 


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 5782 will be enacted early in fiscal year 2007 and that the authorized amounts will be appropriated for each year. Outlay estimates are based on the historical spending patterns of pipeline safety programs.

CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 5782 would cost $98 million over the 2007-2011 period. This estimate includes net spending of about $63 million for PHMSA's pipeline safety programs, reflecting the difference between gross authorized appropriations of about $330 million over the 2007-2010 period and authorized collections of almost $253 million from pipeline user fees over the same period. The gross authorization for those activities would average more than $80 million a year, and the fees would average more than $60 million a year. By comparison, the gross appropriation for pipeline safety activities was $72 million in 2006, and fee collections totaled almost $58 million that year. In addition, the bill would authorize the appropriation of nearly $35 million for grants to states and nonprofit organizations.

Also, the bill would permit the administration to charge fees to operators of certain pipeline facilities that require a design review by PHMSA as a part of their application to construct, expand, or operate a liquefied natural gas pipeline facility. Under current law, the administration charges fees to existing pipeline operators. The bill would allow PHMSA to charge fees to entities proposing to construct a new facility or expand an existing operation. Based on PHMSA's review of three to five applications per year, CBO estimates that the administration would collect almost $5 million over the 2007-2010 period. Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, PHMSA would then spend the almost $5 million over the 2007-2011 period for its pipeline safety activities.

H.R. 5782 would impose civil penalties on any person who excavates in areas containing pipeline facilities without verifying the location of the pipelines or any person who fails to heed location information provided at the site. Collections of penalties are recorded in the budget as revenues. CBO expects that implementing the new penalties authorized by this legislation would increase revenues by less than $500,000 a year.

Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments: H.R. 5782 contains intergovernmental mandates as defined in UMRA because it would impose new safety standards for pipeline operators, some of which are publicly operated. While the aggregate costs of complying with these new standards is uncertain, based on information from government and industry sources, CBO estimates that the costs would not be significant and would not exceed the threshold established in UMRA.

Other provisions of the bill would authorize $126 million in grants over five years for which states and local governments would be eligible to apply.

Estimated impact on the private sector: H.R. 5782 contains private-sector mandates, as defined in UMRA, on operators of distribution and transmission pipelines for natural gas or liquids by increasing user fees, authorizing a new fee and imposing new safety standards. Because many of those mandates would require DOT to prescribe new safety standards for which information currently is not available, CBO cannot determine the direct costs of complying with all of the mandates in the bill or whether the total cost would exceed the annual threshold established by UMRA ($128 million for private-sector mandates in 2006, adjusted annually for inflation).

Pipeline fees

Section 2 contains a mandate on gas and liquid transmission pipeline operators. Under current law, the Secretary collects fees from pipeline operators to offset a large portion of its gross appropriations. The provisions in this section would authorize the Secretary of Transportation to increase the pipeline safety user fee assessed to those operators. In general, the amount of fees collected under the bill would depend on the level of future appropriations. CBO expects that the annual fees collected over the 2007-2010 period would be higher than  they were in previous years and that the fees collected would average more than $60 million a year over that period. By comparison, CBO estimates that fee collections in 2006 will total $58 million.

The bill also would authorize the Secretary to charge pipeline operators a fee to cover the cost of conducting a safety review of their facility design, which is required as part of their application to construct, expand or operate a liquefied natural gas pipeline facility. CBO estimates that operators would pay almost $5 million in such fees over the 2007-2010 period.

New safety standards

In addition, the bill would impose new safety standards on both liquid and natural gas pipeline operators. Under the bill, liquid pipeline operators would be required to abide by new low-stress pipeline requirements, and natural gas pipeline operators would be required to abide by new distribution integrity management requirements. Since several of the safety requirements in the bill hinge on future regulatory action, CBO cannot estimate the cost of those mandates.

Previous CBO estimate: On September 13, 2006, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 5782, the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2006, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on July 19, 2006. The two bills authorize some different activities and different levels of net funding for the PHMSA.

Both versions of H.R. 5782 would impose new federal standards for operators of pipelines. The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's version of the bill, however, also would require operators of natural gas pipelines to make certain equipment changes and to comply with new reporting requirements. Neither bill contains intergovernmental mandates that would exceed the threshold established in UMRA.

The two versions of the bill contain similar private-sector mandates. Both versions would require pipeline operators to pay more in fees and comply with new safety standards. Because the safety standards imposed would depend on how future regulators would be implemented, CBO cannot determine whether the aggregate costs in either version of H.R. 5782 would exceed UMRA's annual threshold for private-sector mandates.

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Gregory Waring. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Sarah Puro. Impact on the Private Sector: Fatimot Ladipo.

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT


The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT


No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this legislation.

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT


Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that the Constitutional authority for this legislation is provided in Article I, section 8, clause 3, which grants Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.

APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH


The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION


Section 1. Short title, amendment of Title 49, United States Code; table of contents

Section 1 establishes the short title as the `Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2006'; provides for an amendment to Title 49, United States Code, and provides the table of contents.

Section 2. Pipeline safety and damage prevention

Section 2(a) adds new Federal requirements to existing one call civil enforcement provisions in Section 60114 for a person who engages in demolition, excavation, tunneling, or construction activity. The section requires such person to first contact the State's one call notification system to establish the location of underground distribution pipelines in the demolition, construction, excavation or tunneling area and requires such person to not disregard the markings established by the operator as required by current law in subsection (b). It also requires such person to take reasonable steps to ensure safe demolition activity to prevent damage to a pipeline. Finally, it requires such person to promptly report damage that may endanger life or cause serious bodily harm to the pipeline operator, and if the damage results in the escape of any flammable, toxic or corrosive gas or liquid, to promptly report to other appropriate authorities by calling the 911 emergency telephone number.

In addition, section 2 contains a limitation on Federal enforcement of this provision within the boundaries of a State that has the authority to impose penalties, unless the DOT Secretary has determined that the State's enforcement is inadequate to protect safety. The section also amends 60122(a)(1) to apply and conform to this new authority. Current law already provides adequate federal criminal enforcement authority, which is not limited to enforcement against operators.

Section 2(b) amends Section 60105(b) addressing the State Pipeline Safety Program Certification requirements to modify the requirement for States to show they are encouraging, promoting, and establishing State programs designed to prevent damage by demolition, excavation, tunneling, or construction activity, with appropriate, enforceable penalties. In addition, section 2(b) adds a new Section 60134.

Section 60134. State damage prevention programs

New Section 60134 establishes a grant program for States that have an effective damage prevention program in place that includes 9 elements, adopted from successful State programs, such as Virginia, or for States that are making substantial progress towards establishing such a program.

The 9 elements focus on partnerships and open participation by operators, excavators, and other stakeholders in the development of methods for establishing and maintaining effective communication from receipt of notification of a construction or related activity through completion of such activity. Other elements of the 9 point plan to be adopted by States include focus on public education, dispute resolution, internal performance measures, enforcement, and review provisions.

Section 2(c) amends Section 60107(a) to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to pay for up to 80 percent of the cost of personnel, equipment, and activities the State authority requires during the calendar year. The current limit in PSIA is 50 percent.

Section 2(d) adds a new subsection to Section 60114 to authorize the Secretary to make grants to an organization or entity for the development of technologies that will facilitate the prevention of pipeline damage caused by demolition, tunneling, excavation, or construction activities, with emphasis on wireless and global positioning technologies having potential for use in connection with notification systems and underground facility locating and marking services.

Section 2(e) amends Chapter 61 of Title 49 on One Call Notification Programs.

Section 6109. Public education and awareness

New Section 6109 authorizes the Secretary to make a one time grant to an appropriate entity for promoting public education and awareness with respect to the 811 national excavation damage prevention phone number.

Section 2(f) amends Section 60117(l) to authorize the Secretary to issue regulations within one year to add a requirement for notice and opportunity for hearing and to further specify the conditions for the Secretary to utilize the safety order authority when there is a condition that poses a pipeline integrity risk to public safety, property or the environment. Section 2(f) establishes further considerations for the Secretary in making the determination and in issuing regulations and allows the Secretary to order the operator of a facility to take necessary corrective action, including physical inspection, testing, or repair, to remedy that condition.

Section 2(g) amends the existing Integrity Enforcement Management Program plans and procedures enforcement provision to clarify that PHMSA may take any appropriate enforcement action under Title 49 when it determines the operator's Integrity Management Plan (IMP) is inadequate, including compliance orders, assessment of civil penalties, or any other provision under this chapter.

Section 2(h) amends Section 60102(k) to require the Secretary to issue regulations subjecting low stress hazardous liquid pipelines to the same standards and regulations as other hazardous liquid pipelines, except for the limited exceptions provided for in this section. The regulations issued under this paragraph shall not apply to gathering lines. Section 2(f) defines a low stress hazardous liquid pipeline as a line that is operating in its entirety at a stress level of 20 percent or less of the specified minimum yield strength of the line pipe. The Secretary shall provide or continue in force exceptions for low-stress hazardous liquid pipelines that are subject to safety regulations of the Unites States Coast Guard, or serve refining, manufacturing, or truck, rail or vessel terminal facilities, if the pipeline is less than one mile long (measured outside facility grounds) and does not cross an offshore area or a waterway currently used for commercial navigation until the regulations become effective. After such regulations become effective, the Secretary may retain or remove those exemptions as appropriate. The requirements of this section do not take effect until the effective date of the rules promulgated by the Secretary.

Section 2(i) requires DOT to review, in consultation with the Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Standards Committee and other appropriate entities, the internal corrosion control regulations for hazardous liquid pipelines under Part 195 CFR Subpart H. The Secretary shall submit a report to the Congress within one year after the date of enactment containing the results of such review, and may modify regulations if necessary and appropriate.

Section 2(j) requires DOE, in consultation with DOT, to review and analyze the domestic transport of crude oil and other petroleum products by pipeline and identify areas where reliability concerns exist or where failure or unplanned loss of individual pipeline facilities may cause shortages of crude oil, petroleum products or price disruptions. Not later than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretaries shall submit a report to the Congress setting forth their recommendations to reduce the likelihood of such shortages or disruptions.

Section 2(k) requires the Secretary to review and comment on the Comptroller General report issued under Section 14(d)(1) of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (40 U.S.C. 60109 note), and not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, transmit to the Congress any legislative recommendations the Secretary considers necessary and appropriate to implement the conclusions of that report.

Section 2(l) amends Section 60130 to require the Secretary to establish competitive procedures for awarding grants under this section. Section 2(l) further establishes requirements for at least the first 3 grants awarded under this section to be demonstration grants for evaluating the utility of grants under this section, not to exceed $25,000. It also requires each recipient of a grant under this section to ensure the technical findings made possible by the grants are made available to the relevant operators, local communities, and other parties and that open communication between the grant recipients and local operators and communities is encouraged.

Section 2(m) adds a new Section 60135 to Chapter 601.

Section 60135. Enforcement transparency

New Section 60135 requires the Secretary, within 12 months after the date of enactment, to provide a monthly updated summary to the public of all gas and liquid pipeline enforcement actions taken by the Secretary or PHMSA, from the time a notice commencing an action is issued until the enforcement action is final. Includes minimum requirements for the summaries to contain, including identification of the operator, penalties proposed, alleged violation, final assessment amount, and the reasons for a reduction in the penalty, if any. New Section 60135 also provides a mechanism by which a pipeline operator named in an enforcement action may make information, explanations, or documents it believes are responsive to the enforcement action available to the public. A section on electronic posting is also included, as well as FOIA protections.

Section 2(n) amends Section 60117 to add a new subsection (n) to authorize PHMSA to receive compensation from project applicants for facility design reviews that the agency performs for proposed LNG facilities.

Section 2(o) modifies the definitions of `interstate gas pipeline facility' and `intrastate gas pipeline facility' such that direct sales laterals are no longer excluded from the Federal pipeline safety requirements.

Section 3. Distribution integrity management program rulemaking deadline

Section 3 amends Section 60109 to require the Secretary to prescribe minimum standards for integrity management programs for distribution pipelines.

Section 4. Authorization of appropriations

Section 4 amends Section 60125(a) to reauthorize amounts to be appropriated as directed by the Secretary, from fees collected under Section 60301 from 2007-2010, and from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. Section 4 also amends Section 60125(b)(l) to carry out Section 60107, and from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and makes other conforming changes.

Section 5. Incident reporting

Section 5 requires the Secretary to, not later than 12 months after enactment, review the incident reporting requirements for operators of natural gas pipelines and modify the reporting criteria as appropriate to ensure that the incident data accurately reflects incident trends over time, taking into consideration the recommendations from the Comptroller General in GAO Report 06-946.

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED




TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE


* * * * * * *

SUBTITLE III--GENERAL AND INTERMODAL PROGRAMS


* * * * * * *

CHAPTER 61--ONE-CALL NOTIFICATION PROGRAMS




Sec.

6101. Purposes.

* * * * * * *

6109. Public education and awareness.



* * * * * * *

Sec. 6105. Implementation of best practices guidelines




* * * * * * *







* * * * * * *

Sec. 6107. Authorization of appropriations






* * * * * * *

Sec. 6109. Public education and awareness






* * * * * * *

SUBTITLE VIII--PIPELINES


* * * * * * *

CHAPTER 601--SAFETY




Sec.

60101. Definitions.

* * * * * * *

60134. State damage prevention programs.

60135. Enforcement transparency.

60136. Incident reporting.



Sec. 60101. Definitions






* * * * * * *

















* * * * * * *









* * * * * * *

Sec. 60102. Purpose and general authority




* * * * * * *























* * * * * * *

Sec. 60105. State pipeline safety program certifications








* * * * * * *





* * * * * * *

Sec. 60107. State pipeline safety grants






* * * * * * *

Sec. 60109. High-density population areas and environmentally sensitive areas




* * * * * * *





* * * * * * *







* * * * * * *





* * * * * * *



* * * * * * *

Sec. 60114. One-call notification systems




* * * * * * *















* * * * * * *

Sec. 60117. Administrative




* * * * * * *



















* * * * * * *

Sec. 60122. Civil penalties




* * * * * * *

Sec. 60125. Authorization of appropriations










































* * * * * * *











* * * * * * *

Sec. 60130. Pipeline safety information grants to communities












* * * * * * *



* * * * * * *

Sec. 60134. State damage prevention programs






































Sec. 60135. Enforcement transparency












Sec. 60136. Incident reporting




* * * * * * *