[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 190 (Monday, December 12, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H8330-H8340]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1710
  PIPELINE SAFETY, REGULATORY CERTAINTY, AND JOB CREATION ACT OF 2011

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 2845) to amend title 49, United States Code, to provide for 
enhanced safety and environmental protection in pipeline 
transportation, to provide for enhanced reliability in the 
transportation of the Nation's energy products by pipeline, and for 
other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 2845

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

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

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Pipeline 
     Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011''.
       (b) Amendment of Title 49, United States Code.--Except as 
     otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this Act an 
     amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment to, 
     or a repeal of, a section or other provision, the reference 
     shall be considered to be made to a section or other 
     provision of title 49, United States Code.
       (c) Definitions.--Any term used in this Act that is defined 
     in chapter 601 of title 49, United States Code, shall have 
     the meaning given that term in that chapter.
       (d) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; amendment of title 49, United States Code; 
              definitions; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Civil penalties.
Sec. 3. Pipeline damage prevention.
Sec. 4. Automatic and remote-controlled shut-off valves.
Sec. 5. Integrity management.
Sec. 6. Public education and awareness.
Sec. 7. Cast iron gas pipelines.
Sec. 8. Leak detection.
Sec. 9. Accident and incident notification.
Sec. 10. Transportation-related onshore facility response plan 
              compliance.
Sec. 11. Transportation-related oil flow lines.
Sec. 12. Cost recovery for design reviews.
Sec. 13. Biofuel pipelines.
Sec. 14. Carbon dioxide pipelines.
Sec. 15. Study of transportation of diluted bitumen.
Sec. 16. Study of non-petroleum hazardous liquids transported by 
              pipeline.
Sec. 17. Clarifications.
Sec. 18. Maintenance of effort.
Sec. 19. Administrative enforcement process.
Sec. 20. Gas and hazardous liquid gathering lines.
Sec. 21. Authorization of appropriations.

     SEC. 2. CIVIL PENALTIES.

       (a) General Penalties; Penalty Considerations.--Section 
     60122 is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1)--
       (A) in the first sentence by striking ``$100,000'' and 
     inserting ``$175,000''; and
       (B) in the last sentence by striking ``$1,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$1,750,000''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(1)(B) by striking ``the ability to 
     pay,''.
       (b) Operator Assistance in Investigations.--Section 
     60118(e) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(e) Operator Assistance in Investigations.--
       ``(1) Assistance and access.--If the Secretary or the 
     National Transportation Safety Board investigates an accident 
     involving a pipeline facility, the operator of the facility 
     shall--

[[Page H8331]]

       ``(A) make available to the Secretary or the Board all 
     records and information that in any way pertain to the 
     accident (including integrity management plans and test 
     results); and
       ``(B) afford all reasonable assistance in the investigation 
     of the accident.
       ``(2) Operator assistance in investigations.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary may impose a civil penalty 
     under section 60122 on a person who obstructs or prevents the 
     Secretary from carrying out inspections or investigations 
     under this chapter.
       ``(B) Definitions.--In this paragraph, the following 
     definitions apply:
       ``(i) Obstructs.--The term `obstructs' includes actions 
     that were known, or reasonably should have been known, to 
     prevent, hinder, or impede an investigation without good 
     cause.
       ``(ii) Good cause.--The term `good cause' includes, at a 
     minimum, restricting access to facilities that are not secure 
     or safe for non-pipeline personnel or visitors.''.
       (c) Administrative Penalty Caps Inapplicable.--Section 
     60120(a)(1) is amended by adding at the end the following: 
     ``The maximum amount of civil penalties for administrative 
     enforcement actions under section 60122 shall not apply to 
     enforcement actions under this section.''.
       (d) Judicial Review of Administrative Enforcement Orders.--
     Section 60119(a) is amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading by striking ``and Waiver 
     Orders'' and inserting ``, Orders, and Other Final Agency 
     Actions''; and
       (2) by striking ``about an application for a waiver under 
     section 60118(c) or (d) of this title'' and inserting ``under 
     this chapter''.

     SEC. 3. PIPELINE DAMAGE PREVENTION.

       (a) Minimum Standards for State One-Call Notification 
     Programs.--Section 6103(a) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Minimum Standards.--
       ``(1) In general.--In order to qualify for a grant under 
     section 6106, a State one-call notification program, at a 
     minimum, shall provide for--
       ``(A) appropriate participation by all underground facility 
     operators, including all government operators;
       ``(B) appropriate participation by all excavators, 
     including all government and contract excavators; and
       ``(C) flexible and effective enforcement under State law 
     with respect to participation in, and use of, one-call 
     notification systems.
       ``(2) Exemptions prohibited.--In order to qualify for a 
     grant under section 6106, a State one-call notification 
     program may not exempt municipalities, State agencies, or 
     their contractors from its one-call notification system 
     requirements.''.
       (b) State Damage Prevention Programs.--Section 60134(a) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (2)(B) by striking ``(b).'' and inserting 
     ``(b); and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) does not provide any exemptions to municipalities, 
     State agencies, or their contractors from its one-call 
     notification system requirements.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect 2 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act.
       (d) Third Party Damage.--
       (1) Study.--The Secretary of Transportation shall conduct a 
     study on the impact of third party damage on pipeline safety.
       (2) Contents.--The study shall include--
       (A) an analysis of the frequency and severity of different 
     types of third party damage incidents;
       (B) an analysis of exemptions to the one-call notification 
     system requirements in each State;
       (C) a comparison of exemptions to the one-call notification 
     system requirements in each State to the types of third party 
     damage incidents in that State; and
       (D) an analysis of the potential safety benefits and 
     adverse consequences of eliminating all exemptions for 
     mechanized excavation from State one-call notification 
     systems.
       (3) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure and Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation a 
     report on the results of the study.

     SEC. 4. AUTOMATIC AND REMOTE-CONTROLLED SHUT-OFF VALVES.

       Section 60102 is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (j)(3); and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(n) Automatic and Remote-Controlled Shut-Off Valves for 
     New Transmission Pipelines.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may require by regulation, 
     if determined appropriate by the Secretary, the use of 
     automatic or remote-controlled shut-off valves, or equivalent 
     technology, where economically, technically, and 
     operationally feasible on transmission pipeline facilities 
     constructed or entirely replaced after the date on which the 
     Secretary issues the final rule containing such requirement.
       ``(2) Factors for consideration.--In determining whether to 
     proceed with a rulemaking under paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     shall consider the factors specified in subsection (b)(2).''.

     SEC. 5. INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT.

       (a) Evaluation.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall 
     evaluate--
       (1) whether integrity management system requirements, or 
     elements thereof, should be expanded beyond high consequence 
     areas; and
       (2) with respect to gas transmission pipeline facilities, 
     whether applying integrity management program requirements, 
     or elements thereof, to additional areas would mitigate the 
     need for class location requirements.
       (b) Repair Criteria.--In conducting the evaluation under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall consider applying repair 
     criteria, such as pressure reductions and special 
     requirements for scheduling remediation, to areas that are 
     not high consequence areas.
       (c) Report.--Based on the evaluation to be conducted under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure and Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation a 
     report containing the Secretary's analysis and findings 
     regarding--
       (1) expansion of integrity management requirements, or 
     elements thereof, beyond high consequence areas; and
       (2) with respect to gas transmission pipeline facilities, 
     whether applying the integrity management program 
     requirements, or elements thereof, to additional areas would 
     mitigate the need for class location requirements.
       (d) Data Reporting.--The Secretary shall collect any 
     relevant data necessary to complete the evaluation required 
     by subsection (a).
       (e) Technical Correction.--Section 60109(c)(3)(B) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(B) Subject to paragraph (5), periodic reassessments of 
     the facility, at a minimum of once every 7 calendar years, 
     using methods described in subparagraph (A). Such deadline 
     shall be extended for an additional 6 months if the operator 
     submits written notice to the Secretary that includes an 
     explanation of the need for the extension.''.
       (f) Rulemaking Requirements.--
       (1) Review period defined.--In this subsection, the term 
     ``review period'' means the period beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act and ending on the earlier of--
       (A) the date that is 1 year after the date of completion of 
     the report under subsection (c); or
       (B) the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (2) Congressional authority.--In order to provide Congress 
     the necessary time to review the results of the report 
     required by subsection (c) and implement appropriate 
     recommendations, the Secretary shall not, during the review 
     period, proceed with a rulemaking to prescribe regulations 
     described in paragraph (3).
       (3) Standards.--Following the review period, the Secretary 
     may, as appropriate, prescribe regulations that--
       (A) expand integrity management system requirements, or 
     elements thereof, beyond high consequence areas; and
       (B) remove redundant class location requirements for gas 
     transmission pipeline facilities that are regulated under an 
     integrity management program adopted and implemented under 
     section 60109(c)(2) of title 49, United States Code.
       (4) Savings clause.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this subsection, the Secretary, during the review period, may 
     proceed to a rulemaking to prescribe regulations described in 
     paragraph (3), and may prescribe the regulations, if the 
     Secretary determines that a condition that poses a risk to 
     public safety, property, or the environment is present or an 
     imminent hazard exists and that the rulemaking will address 
     the risk or hazard.
       (B) Imminent hazard defined.--In subparagraph (A), the term 
     ``imminent hazard'' means the existence of a condition 
     related to pipelines or pipeline operations that presents a 
     substantial likelihood that death, serious illness, severe 
     personal injury, or substantial endangerment to health, 
     property, or the environment may occur.
       (g) Report to Congress on Risk-Based Pipeline Reassessment 
     Intervals.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall evaluate--
       (1) whether risk-based reassessment intervals are a more 
     effective alternative for managing risks to pipelines in 
     high-consequence areas once baseline assessments are complete 
     when compared to a 7-year reassessment interval;
       (2) the number of anomalies found in baseline assessments 
     required under section 60109(c)(3)(A) of title 49, United 
     States Code, as compared to the number of anomalies found in 
     reassessments required under section 60109(c)(3)(B) of such 
     title; and
       (3) the progress made in incorporating the recommendations 
     in GAO Report 06-945 and the current relevance of 
     recommendations not incorporated to date.
       (h) High Consequence Area Defined.--In this section, the 
     term ``high consequence area'' means an area described in 
     section 60109(a) of title 49, United States Code.

     SEC. 6. PUBLIC EDUCATION AND AWARENESS.

       (a) National Pipeline Mapping System.--
       (1) Map of high consequence areas.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation shall--
       (A) maintain, as part of the National Pipeline Mapping 
     System, a map of all designated high consequence areas (as 
     described in section 60109(a) of title 49, United States 
     Code) in which pipelines are required to meet integrity 
     management safety regulations, excluding any proprietary or 
     sensitive security information; and
       (B) update the map biennially.
       (2) Program to promote awareness of national pipeline 
     mapping system.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop and 
     implement a program promoting greater awareness of the 
     existence of the National Pipeline Mapping System to State 
     and local emergency responders and other interested parties. 
     The program shall

[[Page H8332]]

     include guidance on how to use the National Pipeline Mapping 
     System to locate pipelines in communities and local 
     jurisdictions.
       (b) Information to Emergency Response Agencies.--
       (1) Guidance.--Not later than 18 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue guidance to 
     owners and operators of pipeline facilities on the importance 
     of providing system-specific information about their pipeline 
     facilities to emergency response agencies of the communities 
     and jurisdictions in which those facilities are located.
       (2) Consultation.--Before issuing guidance under paragraph 
     (1), the Secretary shall consult with owners and operators of 
     pipeline facilities to determine the extent to which the 
     owners and operators are already providing system-specific 
     information about their pipeline facilities to emergency 
     response agencies.

     SEC. 7. CAST IRON GAS PIPELINES.

       (a) Follow-Up Surveys.--Section 60108(d) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Not later than December 31, 2012, and every 2 years 
     thereafter, the Secretary shall conduct a follow-up survey to 
     measure the progress that owners and operators of pipeline 
     facilities have made in implementing their plans for the safe 
     management and replacement of cast iron gas pipelines.''.
       (b) Status Report.--Not later than December 31, 2013, the 
     Secretary of Transportation shall transmit to the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure and Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation a 
     report that--
       (1) identifies the total mileage of cast iron gas pipelines 
     in the United States; and
       (2) evaluates the progress that owners and operators of 
     pipeline facilities have made in implementing their plans for 
     the safe management and replacement of cast iron gas 
     pipelines.

     SEC. 8. LEAK DETECTION.

       (a) Leak Detection Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall 
     submit to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure and Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce a report on leak detection systems utilized by 
     operators of hazardous liquid pipeline facilities and 
     transportation-related flow lines.
       (2) Contents.--The report shall include--
       (A) an analysis of the technical limitations of current 
     leak detection systems, including the systems' ability to 
     detect ruptures and small leaks that are ongoing or 
     intermittent, and what can be done to foster development of 
     better technologies; and
       (B) an analysis of the feasibility of establishing 
     technically, operationally, and economically feasible 
     standards for the capability of such systems to detect leaks, 
     and the safety benefits and adverse consequences of requiring 
     operators to use leak detection systems.
       (b) Rulemaking Requirements.--
       (1) Review period defined.--In this subsection, the term 
     ``review period'' means the period beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act and ending on the earlier of--
       (A) the date that is 1 year after the date of completion of 
     the report under subsection (a); or
       (B) the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (2) Congressional authority.--In order to provide Congress 
     the necessary time to review the results of the report 
     required by subsection (a) and implement appropriate 
     recommendations, the Secretary shall not, during the review 
     period, proceed with a rulemaking to prescribe regulations 
     described in paragraph (3).
       (3) Standards.--Following the review period, the Secretary 
     may, as appropriate, prescribe regulations that--
       (A) require operators of hazardous liquid pipeline 
     facilities to use leak detection systems; and
       (B) establish technically, operationally, and economically 
     feasible standards for the capability of such systems to 
     detect leaks.
       (4) Savings clause.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this subsection, the Secretary, during the review period, may 
     proceed to a rulemaking to prescribe regulations described in 
     paragraph (3), and may prescribe the regulations, if the 
     Secretary determines that a condition that poses a risk to 
     public safety, property, or the environment is present or an 
     imminent hazard exists and that the rulemaking will address 
     the risk or hazard.
       (B) Imminent hazard defined.--In subparagraph (A), the term 
     ``imminent hazard'' means the existence of a condition 
     related to pipelines or pipeline operations that presents a 
     substantial likelihood that death, serious illness, severe 
     personal injury, or substantial endangerment to health, 
     property, or the environment may occur.

     SEC. 9. ACCIDENT AND INCIDENT NOTIFICATION.

       (a) Revision of Regulations.--Not later than 18 months 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Transportation shall revise regulations issued under sections 
     191.5 and 195.52 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, to 
     establish specific time limits for telephonic or electronic 
     notice of accidents and incidents involving pipeline 
     facilities to the Secretary and the National Response Center.
       (b) Minimum Requirements.--In revising the regulations, the 
     Secretary, at a minimum, shall--
       (1) establish time limits for telephonic or electronic 
     notification of an accident or incident to require such 
     notification not less than 1 hour and not more than 2 hours 
     after discovery of the accident or incident;
       (2) review procedures for owners and operators of pipeline 
     facilities and the National Response Center to provide 
     thorough and coordinated notification to all relevant State 
     and local emergency response officials, including 911 
     emergency call centers, for the jurisdictions in which those 
     pipeline facilities are located in the event of an accident 
     or incident, and revise such procedures as appropriate; and
       (3) require such owners and operators to revise their 
     initial telephonic or electronic notice to the Secretary and 
     the National Response Center with an estimated amount of the 
     product released, an estimated number of fatalities and 
     injuries, if any, and any other information determined 
     appropriate by the Secretary within 24 to 48 hours of the 
     accident or incident, to the extent practicable.
       (c) Updating of Reports.--After receiving revisions 
     described in subsection (b)(3), the National Response Center 
     shall update the initial report on an accident or incident 
     instead of generating a new report.

     SEC. 10. TRANSPORTATION-RELATED ONSHORE FACILITY RESPONSE 
                   PLAN COMPLIANCE.

       (a) In General.--Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 
     311(m)(2) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 
     U.S.C. 1321(m)(2)) are each amended by striking 
     ``Administrator or'' and inserting ``Administrator, the 
     Secretary of Transportation, or''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 311(b)(6)(A) of the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6)(A)) 
     is amended by striking ``operating or'' and inserting 
     ``operating, the Secretary of Transportation, or''.

     SEC. 11. TRANSPORTATION-RELATED OIL FLOW LINES.

       Section 60102, as amended by this Act, is further amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(o) Transportation-Related Oil Flow Lines.--
       ``(1) Data collection.--The Secretary may collect 
     geospatial or technical data on transportation-related oil 
     flow lines, including unregulated transportation-related oil 
     flow lines.
       ``(2) Transportation-related oil flow line defined.--In 
     this subsection, the term `transportation-related oil flow 
     line' means a pipeline transporting oil off of the grounds of 
     the well where it originated across areas not owned by the 
     producer, regardless of the extent to which the oil has been 
     processed, if at all.
       ``(3) Limitation.--Nothing in this subsection authorizes 
     the Secretary to prescribe standards for the movement of oil 
     through production, refining, or manufacturing facilities, or 
     through oil production flow lines located on the grounds of 
     wells.''.

     SEC. 12. COST RECOVERY FOR DESIGN REVIEWS.

       (a) In General.--Section 60117(n) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(n) Cost Recovery for Design Reviews.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Review costs.--For any project described in 
     subparagraph (B), if the Secretary conducts facility design 
     safety reviews in connection with a proposal to construct, 
     expand, or operate a new gas or hazardous liquid pipeline 
     facility or liquefied natural gas pipeline facility, the 
     Secretary may require the person proposing the project to pay 
     the costs incurred by the Secretary relating to such reviews. 
     If the Secretary exercises the cost recovery authority 
     described in this subsection, the Secretary shall prescribe a 
     fee structure and assessment methodology that is based on the 
     costs of providing these reviews and shall prescribe 
     procedures to collect fees under this subsection. The 
     Secretary shall not collect design safety review fees under 
     this chapter and section 60301 for the same design safety 
     review.
       ``(B) Projects to which applicable.--Subparagraph (A) 
     applies to any project that--
       ``(i) has design and construction costs totaling at least 
     $3,400,000,000, as adjusted for inflation, based on a good 
     faith estimate developed by the person proposing the project; 
     or
       ``(ii) uses new or novel technologies or design.
       ``(2) Notification.--For any new pipeline facility 
     construction project for which the Secretary will conduct 
     design reviews, the person proposing the project shall notify 
     the Secretary and provide the design specifications, 
     construction plans and procedures, and related materials at 
     least 120 days prior to the commencement of construction. If 
     the Secretary determines that the proposed design of the 
     project is inconsistent with pipeline safety, the Secretary 
     shall provide written comments, feedback, and guidance on the 
     project on or before the 60th day following the date of 
     receipt of the design specifications, construction plans and 
     procedures, and related materials for the project.
       ``(3) Pipeline safety design review fund.--
       ``(A) Establishment.--There is established a Pipeline 
     Safety Design Review Fund in the Treasury of the United 
     States.
       ``(B) Deposits.--The Secretary shall deposit funds paid 
     under this subsection into the Fund.
       ``(C) Use.--Amounts in the Fund shall be available to the 
     Secretary, in amounts specified in appropriations Acts, to 
     offset the costs of conducting facility design safety reviews 
     under this subsection.
       ``(4) No additional permitting authority.--Nothing in this 
     subsection shall be construed as authorizing the Secretary to 
     require a person to obtain a permit before beginning design 
     and construction in connection with a project described in 
     paragraph (1)(B).''.
       (b) Guidance.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall 
     issue guidance to clarify the meaning of the term ``new or 
     novel technologies or design'' as used in section 60117(n) of 
     title 49, United States Code, as amended by subsection (a) of 
     this section.

     SEC. 13. BIOFUEL PIPELINES.

       Section 60101(a)(4) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;

[[Page H8333]]

       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C); 
     and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       ``(B) non-petroleum fuels, including biofuels, that are 
     flammable, toxic, or corrosive or would be harmful to the 
     environment if released in significant quantities; and''.

     SEC. 14. CARBON DIOXIDE PIPELINES.

       Section 60102(i) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(i) Pipelines Transporting Carbon Dioxide.--
       ``(1) Minimum safety standards.--The Secretary shall 
     prescribe minimum safety standards for the transportation of 
     carbon dioxide by pipeline in a gaseous state.
       ``(2) Standards applicable to certain pipelines.--For 
     pipelines that transport carbon dioxide in both a liquid and 
     gaseous state, the Secretary shall apply standards, in effect 
     on the date of enactment of the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory 
     Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011, for the 
     transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline in a liquid 
     state to the transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline in 
     a gaseous state.''.

     SEC. 15. STUDY OF TRANSPORTATION OF DILUTED BITUMEN.

       Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall complete a 
     comprehensive review of hazardous liquid pipeline facility 
     regulations to determine whether these regulations are 
     sufficient to regulate pipeline facilities used for the 
     transportation of diluted bitumen. In conducting this review, 
     the Secretary shall conduct an analysis of whether any 
     increase in risk of release exists for pipeline facilities 
     transporting diluted bitumen. The Secretary shall report the 
     results of this review to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and Committee 
     on Energy and Commerce.

     SEC. 16. STUDY OF NON-PETROLEUM HAZARDOUS LIQUIDS TRANSPORTED 
                   BY PIPELINE.

       The Secretary of Transportation may conduct an analysis of 
     the transportation of non-petroleum hazardous liquids by 
     pipeline facility for the purpose of identifying the extent 
     to which pipeline facilities are currently being used to 
     transport non-petroleum hazardous liquids, such as chlorine, 
     from chemical production facilities across land areas not 
     owned by the producer that are accessible to the public. The 
     analysis should identify the extent to which the safety of 
     the pipeline facilities is unregulated by the States and 
     evaluate whether the transportation of such chemicals by 
     pipeline facility across areas accessible to the public would 
     present significant risks to public safety, property, or the 
     environment in the absence of regulation. The results of the 
     analysis shall be made available to the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure and Committee on Energy and Commerce.

     SEC. 17. CLARIFICATIONS.

       (a) Amendment of Procedures Clarification.--Section 
     60108(a)(1) is amended by striking ``an intrastate'' and 
     inserting ``a''.
       (b) Owner and Operator Clarification.--Section 
     60102(a)(2)(A) is amended by striking ``owners and 
     operators'' and inserting ``any or all of the owners or 
     operators''.

     SEC. 18. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.

       Section 60107(b) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``For each of fiscal years 2012 and 2013, the 
     Secretary shall grant such a wavier to a State if the State 
     can demonstrate an inability to maintain or increase the 
     required funding share of its pipeline safety program at or 
     above the level required by this subsection due to economic 
     hardship in that State. For fiscal year 2014 and each fiscal 
     year thereafter, the Secretary may grant such a waiver to a 
     State if the State can make the demonstration described in 
     the preceding sentence.''.

     SEC. 19. ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS.

       (a) Issuance of Regulations.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall prescribe 
     regulations--
       (A) requiring hearings under sections 60112, 60117, 60118, 
     and 60122 to be convened before a presiding official;
       (B) providing the opportunity for any person requesting a 
     hearing under section 60112, 60117, 60118, or 60122 to 
     arrange for a transcript of that hearing, at the expense of 
     the requesting person;
       (C) ensuring expedited review of any order issued pursuant 
     to section 60112(e);
       (D) implementing a separation of functions between 
     personnel involved with investigative and prosecutorial 
     activities and advising the Secretary on findings and 
     determinations; and
       (E) prohibiting ex-parte communication relevant to the 
     question to be decided in the case by parties to an 
     investigation or hearing.
       (2) Presiding official.--The regulations prescribed under 
     this subsection shall--
       (A) define the term ``presiding official'' to mean the 
     person who conducts any hearing relating to civil penalty 
     assessments, compliance orders, safety orders, or corrective 
     action orders; and
       (B) require that the presiding official must be an attorney 
     on the staff of the Deputy Chief Counsel that is not engaged 
     in investigative or prosecutorial functions, including the 
     preparation of notices of probable violations, notices 
     relating to civil penalty assessments, notices relating to 
     compliance, or notices of proposed corrective actions.
       (3) Expedited review.--The regulations prescribed under 
     this subsection shall define the term ``expedited review'' 
     for the purposes of paragraph (1)(C).
       (b) Standards of Judicial Review.--Section 60119(a) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) A judicial review of agency action under this section 
     shall apply the standards of review established in section 
     706 of title 5.''.

     SEC. 20. GAS AND HAZARDOUS LIQUID GATHERING LINES.

       (a) Review.--The Secretary of Transportation shall complete 
     a review of existing Federal and State regulations for gas 
     and hazardous liquid gathering lines located onshore and 
     offshore in the United States, including within the inlets of 
     the Gulf of Mexico.
       (b) Report to Congress.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure and Committee on Energy and Commerce and the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation a 
     report on the results of the review.
       (2) Recommendations.--The report shall include the 
     Secretary's recommendations with respect to--
       (A) the sufficiency of existing Federal and State laws and 
     regulations to ensure the safety of gas and hazardous liquid 
     gathering lines;
       (B) quantifying the economical and technical practicability 
     and challenges of applying existing Federal regulations to 
     gathering lines that are currently not subject to Federal 
     regulation when compared to the public safety benefits; and
       (C) subject to a risk-based assessment, the need to modify 
     or revoke existing exemptions from Federal regulation for gas 
     and hazardous liquid gathering lines.

     SEC. 21. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Gas and Hazardous Liquid.--Section 60125(a) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(a) Gas and Hazardous Liquid.--
       ``(1) In general.--To carry out the provisions of this 
     chapter related to gas and hazardous liquid and section 12 of 
     the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (49 U.S.C. 60101 
     note; Public Law 107-355), there is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Department of Transportation for each of 
     fiscal years 2012 through 2015, from fees collected under 
     section 60301, $88,014,000, of which $4,686,000 is for 
     carrying out such section 12 and $34,461,000 is for making 
     grants.
       ``(2) Trust fund amounts.--In addition to the amounts 
     authorized to be appropriated by paragraph (1), there is 
     authorized to be appropriated for each of fiscal years 2012 
     through 2015 from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to carry 
     out the provisions of this chapter related to hazardous 
     liquid and section 12 of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act 
     of 2002 (49 U.S.C. 60101 note; Public Law 107-355), 
     $18,905,000, of which $2,185,000 is for carrying out such 
     section 12 and $4,985,000 is for making grants.''.
       (b) Emergency Response Grants.--Section 60125(b)(2) is 
     amended by striking ``2007 through 2010'' and inserting 
     ``2012 through 2015''.
       (c) One-Call Notification Programs.--Section 6107 is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a) by striking ``2007 through 2010.'' 
     and inserting ``2012 through 2015.'';
       (2) in subsection (b) by striking ``2007 through 2010.'' 
     and inserting ``2012 through 2015.''; and
       (3) by striking subsection (c).
       (d) State Damage Prevention Programs.--Section 60134 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary to provide grants under 
     this section $1,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2012 through 
     2015. Such funds shall remain available until expended.''.
       (e) Community Pipeline Safety Information Grants.--Section 
     60130 is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by inserting ``to grant recipients and their 
     contractors'' after ``this section''; and
       (B) by inserting ``, for any type of advocacy activity for 
     or against a pipeline construction or expansion project,'' 
     after ``for lobbying''; and
       (2) in subsection (d) by striking ``2010'' and inserting 
     ``2015''.
       (f) Pipeline Transportation Research and Development.--
     Section 12 of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (49 
     U.S.C. 60101 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (d) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Ongoing pipeline transportation research and 
     development.--
       ``(A) In general.--After the initial 5-year program plan 
     has been carried out by the participating agencies, the 
     Secretary of Transportation shall prepare a research and 
     development program plan every 5 years thereafter and shall 
     transmit a report to Congress on the status and results-to-
     date of implementation of the program every 2 years.
       ``(B) Consultation.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     comply with the consultation requirements of subsection 
     (d)(2) when preparing the program plan and in the selection 
     and prioritization of research and development projects.
       ``(C) Funding from non-federal sources.--When carrying out 
     research and development activities, the Secretary, to the 
     greatest extent practicable, shall obtain funding for 
     research and development projects from non-Federal 
     sources.''; and
       (2) in subsection (f) by striking ``2003 through 2006.'' 
     and inserting ``2012 through 2015.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Denham). Pursuant to the rule, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Larsen) each will control 20 minutes.

[[Page H8334]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
to include extraneous materials on H.R. 2845.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This important legislation improves safety, enhances reliability, and 
provides the regulatory certainty necessary to create jobs.
  I am very proud of the work that has gone into this bill, both across 
the aisle and between the committees. This legislation represents a 
bipartisan and bicameral agreement reached by the House Transportation 
Committee, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the Senate 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. I am also proud this 
legislation is supported by both the pipeline industry and key safety 
advocates.
  The United States has the largest network of energy pipelines in the 
world, and pipelines are the energy lifelines that power nearly all of 
our daily activities. The hallmark of America's 2.5 million-mile 
pipeline network continues to be that it delivers extraordinary volumes 
of product reliably, safely, efficiently, and economically. Pipelines 
are the safest and the most cost-effective means to transport the 
natural gas and hazardous liquid products that fuel our economy. Since 
1986, the volume of energy products transported through pipelines has 
increased by one-third, yet the number of reportable incidents has 
decreased by 28 percent. While the data show that Federal pipeline 
safety programs have been on the right track, recent pipeline incidents 
suggest there continues to be room for improvement.
  H.R. 2845 builds on our strong commitment to the improved safety and 
enhanced reliability of the transportation of our Nation's energy 
products by pipeline.
  Specifically, the legislation reauthorizes the Federal pipeline 
safety programs of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 
Administration through FY 2015. It improves pipeline transportation by 
strengthening the enforcement of our current laws and by filling gaps 
in existing laws where necessary. It provides the regulatory certainty 
necessary for pipeline owners and operators to plan infrastructure 
investments and create jobs. It ensures a sensible and practical 
regulatory approach to improving safety that applies cost-benefit 
principles. It protects and preserves congressional authority, keeping 
regulators on a tight leash by ensuring certain key rulemakings are not 
finalized until Congress has an opportunity to act. It addresses 
National Transportation Safety Board recommendations resulting from 
recent pipeline incidents with balanced and reasonable responses, 
including addressing the incidents in California, Michigan, Montana, 
and Pennsylvania.
  There are a few key priority issues I want to highlight in this 
legislation.
  During my time in Congress, I've been disappointed to see the 
executive branch and unelected bureaucrats attempt to take more and 
more control and decisionmaking authority from Congress. These actions 
harm Congress as an institution and make our government further and 
further removed from the American people.
  In this bill, when we call for substantial changes to the Federal 
pipeline safety program, we ask the administration to consider specific 
factors, take into account costs and benefits, and provide Congress 
with recommendations on how the programs should be changed. Congress 
will then have an opportunity to act on those recommendations before 
key rulemakings are finalized. This approach preserves congressional 
authority and will keep regulators from overreaching.
  Another issue I've highlighted on the floor in the past is damage 
prevention, which is the leading cause of pipeline incidents. Our 
legislation improves pipeline damage prevention and cracks down on 
third-party pipeline damage by eliminating unnecessary exemptions.
  At this time I would also like to urge everybody to call before you 
dig and to dial 8-1-1, which is an extremely important part of this 
program in preventing third-party damage in this country.
  In field hearings leading up to the drafting of this legislation, my 
colleague from Pennsylvania, Jim Gerlach, suggested ways in which we 
could use State and local government personnel as force multipliers to 
supplement Federal pipeline safety inspectors. We have built on this 
idea. In this bill, we have included a provision that will allow PHMSA 
to provide training to State and local government personnel and to 
potentially establish regional training centers paid for by the 
pipeline industry at no cost to the Federal Government.
  There is great interest in this unique and permissive approach in my 
home State of Pennsylvania, and I will closely be following the 
implementation of these provisions.
  I was deeply disappointed that language I had included in our 
committee's version of this legislation regarding pipeline permitting 
issues was not included in the final bill. We have big issues with the 
Army Corps of Engineers in Pennsylvania in the permitting of pipes. The 
Corps is encroaching on the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 
Protection, and it has led to significant increases in permitting 
timelines for projects with limited environmental impacts. My colleague 
from West Virginia, Mr. Rahall, has experienced similar issues in his 
home State, all related to the Marcellus shale gas. In the interest of 
compromise and of moving this legislation forward, I was willing to 
withdraw my language and settle on a study on this critical issue, but 
I will continue to monitor this issue closely in Pennsylvania and 
across the United States.
  I am proud of this bill and of the hard work that Chairman Mica, 
Ranking Member Rahall, Subcommittee Ranking Member Brown, and the 
staffs have put in on both sides of the aisle. I would especially like 
to point out Jim Tymon and Steve Martinko, who have logged countless 
hours in helping to move this bill forward. I also want to thank the 
Energy and Commerce Committee, Chairman Fred Upton and Ranking Member 
Waxman, and their staffs for their efforts.
  Our legislation makes a strong program even stronger by keeping in 
place regulatory measures that are working and by making adjustments to 
those that don't. I would urge all of my colleagues to support this 
important legislation that increases safety and creates jobs.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

         House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Space, 
           and Technology,
                                Washington, DC, November 22, 2011.
     Hon. John L. Mica,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Mica: I am writing to you concerning the 
     jurisdictional interest of the Committee on Science, Space, 
     and Technology in H.R. 2845, the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory 
     Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011. The bill contains 
     provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee 
     on Science, Space, and Technology, including those amending 
     Section 12 of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (49 
     U.S.C. 60101 Note; Public Law 107-355).
       I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this 
     legislation before the House of Representatives in an 
     expeditious manner, and accordingly, I will waive further 
     consideration of this bill in Committee. This, of course, 
     being conditional on our mutual understanding that language 
     negotiated with the Science, Space, and Technology Committee 
     will be included in this or similar legislation considered on 
     the House floor. However, agreeing to waive consideration of 
     this bill should not be construed as waiving, reducing, or 
     affecting the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, 
     Space, and Technology.
       Additionally, the Committee on Science, Space, and 
     Technology expressly reserves its authority to seek conferees 
     on any provision within its jurisdiction during any House-
     Senate conference that may be convened on this, or any 
     similar legislation. I ask for your commitment to support any 
     request by the Committee for conferees on H.R. 2845 as well 
     as any similar or related legislation.
       I would also like to take this opportunity to thank you for 
     the positive outcome of the negotiation between our 
     Committees resulting in provisions that seek to ensure a 
     continued positive role for the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology in the area of pipeline 
     transportation research and development.
       I ask that a copy of this letter and your response be 
     included in the report on H.R. 2845

[[Page H8335]]

     and also be placed in the Congressional Record during 
     consideration of this bill on the House floor.
       I look forward to working with you on matters of mutual 
     concern.
           Sincerely,

                                                Ralph M. Hall,

                                                         Chairman,
                      Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
       Enclosure.
                                  ____

         House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and 
           Infrastructure,
                                Washington, DC, November 21, 2011.
     Hon. Ralph M. Hall,
     Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
     2845, the ``Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job 
     Creation Act of 2011.'' The Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure recognizes the Committee on Science, Space, 
     and Technology has a jurisdictional interest H.R. 2845, and I 
     appreciate your effort to facilitate consideration of this 
     bill.
       I concur with you that forgoing action on this bill does 
     not in any way prejudice the Committee on Science, Space, and 
     Technology with respect to its jurisdictional prerogatives on 
     this bill or similar legislation in the future, and I would 
     support your effort to seek appointment of an appropriate 
     number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving 
     this legislation.
       I will include our letters H.R. 2845 in the Congressional 
     Record during House Floor consideration of the bill. Again, I 
     appreciate your cooperation regarding this legislation and I 
     look forward to working with the Committee on Science, Space, 
     and Technology as the bill moves through the legislative 
     process.
           Sincerely,
                                                     John L. Mica,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

         House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and 
           Infrastructure,
                                    Washington, DC, June 24, 2011.
     Hon. Fred Upton,
     Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Upton: I write concerning H.R. 1938, the 
     North American-Made Energy Security Act, which is expected to 
     be scheduled for floor consideration the week of July 25, 
     2011.
       As you know, the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure was listed as the Committee of primary 
     jurisdiction when H.R. 1938 was introduced on May 23, 2011. I 
     recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this 
     legislation before the House of Representatives in an 
     expeditious manner, and accordingly, the Committee will forgo 
     action on the bill.
       The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure takes 
     this action with our mutual understanding that by foregoing 
     consideration of H.R. 1938 at this time, we do not waive any 
     jurisdiction over subject matter contained in this or similar 
     legislation. Further, I request your support in the 
     appointment of conferees from the Committee on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure during any House-Senate conference 
     convened on this legislation.
       As you are aware, the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure is the Committee of primary jurisdiction on 
     any legislation to reauthorize federal pipeline safety 
     programs. As such, our agreement to forego consideration of 
     H.R. 1938 is also conditional on our mutual understanding 
     that the Committee on Energy and Commerce will not take any 
     Full Committee action on legislation related to the 
     reauthorizing of the federal pipeline safety programs until 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has acted 
     on such legislation.
       I would appreciate your response to this letter, confirming 
     this understanding, and would ask that a copy of our exchange 
     of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional 
     Record during Floor consideration.
           Sincerely,
                                                     John L. Mica,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,


                             Committee on Energy and Commerce,

                                    Washington, DC, June 18, 2011.
     Hon. John L. Mica,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Mica:  Thank you for your letter regarding 
     H.R. 1938, the North American-Made Energy Security Act. The 
     Committee on Energy and Commerce recognizes that the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has primary 
     jurisdiction over H.R. 1938, and I appreciate your effort to 
     facilitate consideration of this bill.
       I concur with you that foregoing action on H.R. 1938 does 
     not in any way prejudice the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure with respect to its jurisdictional 
     prerogatives on this bill or similar legislation in the 
     future, and I will support your effort to seek appointment of 
     an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate 
     conference involving this or related legislation.
       I also concur with you that the Committee on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure is the Committee of primary jurisdiction 
     on legislation to reauthorize the federal pipeline safety 
     programs and agree to not take action before September 20, 
     2011 at full committee on such legislation, allowing the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to take action 
     on such legislation.
       I appreciate your cooperation regarding this legislation 
     and I will include our letters on H.R. 1938 in the 
     Congressional Record during House floor consideration of the 
     bill.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Fred Upton,
                                                         Chairman.

  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  I rise today in support of H.R. 2845, the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory 
Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011.
  Pipelines have a critical place in our Nation's infrastructure. The 
national pipeline network of over 2.5 million miles efficiently 
delivers gasoline, natural gas, oil, and other essential energy 
products across the country each day. Pipelines play a vital role in 
our daily lives. Cooking and cleaning, the daily commute, air travel, 
and the heating of homes and businesses are all made possible by the 
readily available fuels delivered through pipelines daily. However, 
because of the volatile nature of the products they deliver, incidents 
involving gas and hazardous liquid pipeline can and have had serious 
consequences.
  On June 10, 1999, a pipeline explosion caused the release of about 
237,000 gallons of gasoline into a creek that flowed through Whatcom 
Falls Park in Bellingham, Washington, in my district. The gasoline 
ignited and tragically took the lives of two 10-year-old boys and an 
18-year-old young man. Eight additional inhalation injuries occurred in 
a single-family residence, and the city of Bellingham's water treatment 
plant was severely damaged. The wildlife in Whatcom Creek was 
completely destroyed.
  This tragedy inspired the 2002 Pipeline Safety Improvement Act. This 
act increased fines for negligent pipeline operators, improved pipeline 
testing timelines, provided protection for whistleblowers, and allowed 
for the State oversight of pipeline safety. In 2006, Congress 
reauthorized the 2002 law by passing the Pipeline Inspection, 
Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act. These acts of Congress have 
made pipeline safety laws stronger, the construction of new pipelines 
better, and our existing infrastructure safer. While significant 
progress has been made in improving the safety of our Nation's 
pipelines, we must remain vigilant.
  In July 2010, a 30-inch pipeline owned by Enbridge Energy Partners 
ruptured and released 819,000 gallons of oil into the Talmadge Creek, 
located near Marshall, Michigan. The oil flowed into the Kalamazoo 
River, a tributary to Lake Michigan. Heavy rains caused the river to 
overtop existing dams and carried oil 30 miles downstream on the 
Kalamazoo River toward a Superfund site. Almost a year and a half 
later, Enbridge is still cleaning up this spill along the riverbanks.
  Just a few months after the Enbridge spill, in September 2010, an 
intrastate natural gas transmission pipeline owned by Pacific Gas and 
Electric Company ruptured in a residential area in San Bruno, 
California. The released natural gas ignited, resulting in a fire that 
destroyed 38 homes and damaged 70 others. As well, tragically, eight 
people were killed, many were injured, and many more were evacuated.
  The legislation that we are considering today addresses many concerns 
that were raised as a result of these and other incidents. For example, 
following the incident in Bellingham, Washington, National 
Transportation Safety Board investigators found, among other things, 
that Olympic Pipeline had no remote-operated shutoff valves on the 
line, which could have helped prevent the release of hundreds of 
thousands of gallons of gasoline. Following the Bellingham incident, 
the Department of Transportation ordered the pipeline company to 
install an automatic shutoff valve just downstream of the rupture 
location so that the volume of product released would be limited in the 
event of a future pipeline rupture in that area.

                              {time}  1720

  H.R. 2845 addresses the issue of shutoff valves. It requires all gas 
and liquid pipeline operators to install automatic, remote-controlled 
shutoff valves on new and replaced pipelines.
  The bill also doubles civil penalties for pipeline safety violations 
from

[[Page H8336]]

$100,000 to $200,000 per violation and from $1 million to $2 million 
for maximum penalties.
  It requires the Secretary of the Department of Transportation to 
evaluate and then issue regulations to expand integrity management 
beyond high-consequence areas, to establish performance standards for 
leak detection systems and require hazardous liquid pipeline operators 
to install leak protection systems that meet such performance 
standards.
  It requires pipeline operators, in response to San Bruno, to report 
to DOT anytime their facilities exceed maximum allowable operating 
pressure and to conduct tests to confirm the material strength of 
previously untested gas transmission pipelines in high-consequence 
areas. And finally, it increases the level of pipeline safety 
inspectors at DOT by 10 and increases the amount of technical 
assistance grants that are awarded to local communities from $1 million 
to $1.5 million annually.
  H.R. 2845 is a step in the right direction when it comes to pipeline 
safety. This bill is supported by industry, and it is supported by 
pipeline safety and community groups like the Pipeline Safety Trust.
  I want to thank the chairman and all the committee members for 
working on this legislation. I want to thank Carl Weimer, who is the 
executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust in Bellingham, which 
formed after the 1999 pipeline explosion, as well for his continued 
commitment to these issues.
  I strongly urge Members to support this bill, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Upton), the distinguished chairman of the Energy and 
Commerce Committee.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the amendment to H.R. 
2845, the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act 
of 2011.
  Enacting pipeline safety this year has been a personal priority of 
mine and a top priority of the entire Energy and Commerce Committee on 
a very strong bipartisan basis. This legislation is the product of 
collaboration between our committee, Energy and Commerce members, the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Senate 
Committee on Commerce; and it reflects consensus across party lines.
  With it, we make great strides to ensure our Nation's energy supplies 
are transported in as safe a manner as possible. Over the last couple 
of years, several major pipeline accidents have occurred across the 
country that revealed specific gaps in pipeline safety laws and 
regulations. It is our duty in Congress to look at these events and 
determine what we can do to better protect the public and the 
environment.
  Among these accidents was a 20,000-barrel oil pipeline spill in a 
tributary of the Kalamazoo River, just outside of my district. The 
spill forced dozens of families out of their homes--in many cases, 
permanently--and caused extensive environmental damage to a waterway 
many residents enjoyed for fishing and canoeing.
  Unfortunately, this is not the only major accident in recent memory. 
The September 2010 gas pipeline explosion in San Bruno, California, 
killed eight people and destroyed 37 homes. Another gas line explosion 
last year in Allentown, Pennsylvania, killed five people as well. And 
this summer, an oil pipeline buried underneath the iconic Yellowstone 
River in Wyoming ruptured and sent over 1,000 barrels of crude oil 
downstream.
  These incidents highlighted, certainly, shortcomings in our Nation's 
pipeline safety laws, and today we are here to correct that.
  The legislation before us today offers historic improvements to the 
manner in which the Federal Government regulates energy pipelines. It 
accomplishes this by strengthening standards in several areas, while 
maintaining the continued economical delivery of vital energy supplies. 
For these reasons, this bill enjoys the support of a broad array of 
stakeholders, from the Pipeline Safety Trust to the American Gas 
Association, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, the Gas 
Processors Association, and the Association of Oil Pipe Lines.
  The bill is several months in the making and could not have been 
accomplished without the hard work and dedication of a bipartisan group 
of Members. This is a topic many of us take very seriously, as it 
affected us and our constituents on a personal level. And today we can 
say party affiliation and politics have taken a back seat to 
accomplishing the people's work, and for that, I must offer my 
heartfelt thanks.
  Congratulations to the chairman emeritus of the Energy and Commerce 
Committee who is on the floor tonight, John Dingell; the ranking member 
of the committee who is, again, on the House floor, Henry Waxman; the 
chairman of the Transportation Committee, John Mica; and the chairman 
of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, 
Bill Shuster.
  I urge all Members to support this legislation.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Waxman).
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, during the last year and a half, a series of 
tragic failures have made it clear that we need stronger pipeline 
safety laws. Pipeline failures have occurred all across the country. 
From California and Montana to Michigan and Pennsylvania, we've seen 
natural gas pipeline explosions and ruptured oil pipelines spilling oil 
into rivers.
  In July 2010, a crude oil pipeline ruptured near Marshall, Michigan. 
Over 800,000 gallons of oil spilled into the Talmadge Creek and then 
flowed into the Kalamazoo River. The river is still being cleaned up.
  In September 2010, a natural gas pipeline ruptured and exploded in 
San Bruno, California. Eight people died; many more were injured. The 
gas-fed inferno spread from house to house, driven by the wind. Thirty-
eight homes were destroyed and 70 more were damaged. The explosion left 
behind a suburban street with a massive crater and burned-out vehicles. 
The vice chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board described 
it as ``an amazing scene of destruction.''
  This past summer, an ExxonMobil pipeline ruptured in Montana, 
spilling crude oil into the Yellowstone River.
  Unfortunately, those are just a few of the major accidents we have 
seen during the past 18 months. This bill will update and strengthen 
our pipeline safety laws in the aftermath of these tragedies.
  In response to the Michigan spill, this bill requires pipeline 
operators to notify the safety agency of spills more quickly and 
establishes a process for leak detection standards to be issued for oil 
pipelines.
  In response to the San Bruno tragedy, this bill requires key natural 
gas pipelines to have their maximum safe operating pressure confirmed 
through records or testing. It also instructs the safety agency to 
require the use of automatic or remote-controlled shutoff valves so 
that it doesn't take an hour and a half to stop the flow of gas like it 
did in San Bruno.
  I want to acknowledge the work of my colleague from California, 
Representative Jackie Speier, who fought for a strong response to San 
Bruno, and this bill has been made a better bill by her contributions.
  In light of the Yellowstone River spill, the bill requires the agency 
to review its regulations governing the safety of pipelines buried 
under rivers to ensure they are adequate. The bill includes a number of 
additional improvements to strengthen our pipeline safety laws.
  This is a good bipartisan bill that has the support of both industry 
and safety advocates. The Energy and Commerce Committee and the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee have worked hard to develop 
a combined bill that would have broad support.
  I would like to thank Chairmen Upton, Mica, and Shuster, as well as 
Mr. Dingell, Mr. Rush, Mr. Rahall, and Ms. Brown, for their work on 
this legislation. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this 
bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to just note in 
the legislation, section 6 of H.R. 2845 includes a requirement that the 
Secretary of Transportation provide a person, upon written request, a 
copy of a pipeline company's response plan.
  I think it's important to note and point out to my colleagues that 
these

[[Page H8337]]

plans often contain security-sensitive information about pipelines' 
operating characteristics. If this information fell into the wrong 
hands, it could be a real threat to public safety. In recognition of 
this threat, we've included a provision that directs the Secretary to 
redact security-sensitive information.
  It is my hope that the Secretary ensures that no security-sensitive 
information is released to the public; and the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee will aggressively oversee the implementation 
of this provision to ensure that it is being implemented according to 
congressional intent.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the dean of the House and 
chairman emeritus of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

                              {time}  1730

  Mr. DINGELL. I thank my good friend for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2845. This is a bipartisan 
bill, somewhat a rarity, and the more welcome for that reason. It's 
going to help instill public confidence in our Nation's pipeline safety 
system by increasing safety standards without overly burdensome actions 
towards industry.
  The legislation shows that bipartisanship is possible in this 
Congress, and that we can conduct the business of the American people 
if we will but sit down and work together. I first want to thank 
Chairman Upton and Ranking Member Waxman and my friend, Mr. Larsen of 
Washington, for their hard work. I also want to recognize and thank 
Jeff Baran and Garrett Golding of the committee staff for their hard 
work, as well as Greg Sundstrom of my personal staff, who worked with 
great diligence and skill on this matter. Chairman Mica, Chairman 
Shuster, Ranking Member Rahall, and Mr. Rush also deserve recognition 
for their hard work as the two committees have worked harmoniously 
together to forge an agreement on the final product we have before us 
today.
  The inclusive process used in this case is an excellent model of how 
Congress should move forward on a host of other issues, and I hope that 
the instructive character of it is accepted by my colleagues. Recent 
accidents in California, Pennsylvania, Montana, and my home State of 
Michigan each highlighted serious deficiencies in our pipeline safety 
laws. H.R. 2845 incorporates the lessons learned in these incidents and 
strengthens laws in the areas of concern.
  Specifically, the bill expands the integrity management program to 
improve inspections while phasing out our class location requirements, 
thereby putting stronger safety standards in place while taking steps 
to remove redundant regulations.
  The leak detection, automatic or remote-controlled shut-off valve, 
and maximum allowable operating pressure provisions are a step in the 
right direction and will do much to improve safety. Pipeline safety is 
not a partisan issue but, rather, is something that impacts all 
Americans. We have an obligation to protect the American people and the 
environment from harm while maintaining a system that transports our 
energy resources efficiently.
  It is my hope that the Senate will take up this legislation promptly 
and that the Obama administration will implement these changes in a 
meaningful way. We will all be watching to make sure that this happens.
  Together, we have come up with a sound piece of legislation which has 
the support of both industry and safety advocates, and I urge my 
colleagues to support this legislation.
  I would also like to observe, when one of these things lets go, it's 
quite an event. You will see something that looks a little bit like 
hell with the fire and flame and explosion and blasts and dead people 
and scorched automobiles, homes and the environment. I am delighted to 
see that we are doing this because we are protecting us both from gas 
and oil spills, and the evil consequences of that.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush).
  Mr. RUSH. I thank the gentleman, Mr. Larsen from Washington State, 
for recognizing me and sharing the time with me. I am here to express 
my full support for this bill, H.R. 2845, the Pipeline Safety, 
Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill represents a bipartisan effort and a good-
faith compromise by Members from both sides of the aisle, from multiple 
committees, and of course across both Chambers of Congress.
  During negotiations on the final bill language, I was very fortunate 
to have Administrator Cynthia Quarterman of the Pipeline and Hazardous 
Materials Safety Agency accept my invitation to come out to my State 
and to discuss pipeline safety with representatives from the Illinois 
Commerce Commission, as well as with officials from Will County, which 
accounts for a larger percentage of pipelines than any other county in 
my home State.
  Mr. Speaker, many of the same serious issues regarding pipeline 
safety that were discussed in these meetings are addressed in this 
piece of legislation. I am very pleased with the final product.
  Mr. Speaker, I also would like to thank Members from both sides of 
the aisle, chairman emeritus of the full committee and dean of the 
House, John Dingell; Energy and Commerce Chairman Upton; and Ranking 
Member Waxman, as well as Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman 
Whitfield, for working with my office to include language that will 
require a comprehensive report examining the levels of engagement and 
participation of minority-owned, women-owned and disadvantaged business 
enterprises and contractors involved in the construction and the 
operations of pipelines in this country.
  Additionally, this report will look at the methods for facilitating 
this type of involvement in order to increase the participation of 
minorities and women in the very lucrative pipeline industry. This 
study will be a first step in a process to make sure that the builders 
and contractors in charge of rebuilding America's aging and expanding 
pipeline system will represent the variety of groups and businesses 
that are here in our Nation, including those who are most desperate for 
jobs and economic opportunity.
  I'm pleased to support this legislation, and I urge all of my 
colleagues to join with me in voting for it.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 8 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Mica), the distinguished chairman of the Transportation 
and Infrastructure Subcommittee.
  Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his leadership 
in helping to guide this legislation and important measure through 
Congress. I want to take this opportunity to thank folks on both sides 
of the aisle: Mr. Upton, who chairs the Energy and Commerce Committee; 
I particularly want to thank Ms. Brown, Mr. Rahall, Mr. Waxman; and of 
course others who have helped on the Senate side.
  This legislation is being done really the way Congress is intended to 
work, to try to reach a bicameral, bipartisan consensus. We don't have 
to go to conference. We have worked out some of the issues, and this is 
not an easy piece of legislation to pass. This is a very important 
piece of legislation for the American people as far as our energy 
resources and transporting them safely across the land, as far as an 
industry that is so important to creating jobs and opportunity and 
keeping the cost of energy down for men and women, consumers and people 
hit by difficult times right now, looking for reasonable energy costs 
and keeping the U.S. competitive and providing reasonably costed energy 
and transporting it safely.
  This is probably one of the four main jobs bills, too, that we will 
pass from our committee. We have today the pipeline safety legislation. 
Our committee has also passed the Coast Guard authorization, and we are 
hoping we can reach a consensus on that. We have finished and are 
preconferencing with the Senate the FAA bill which is 4\1/2\ years 
overdue. We inherited that 4 years late, and we are basically finished. 
There are a few items that must be resolved by leadership. Then, 
finally, time did not allow us to finish a major transportation bill, 
sometimes referred to as the highway bill, but this will be more than a 
highway bill. We plan to have that up as soon as we return.

[[Page H8338]]

                              {time}  1740

  So those are our four major pieces of legislation, and this 
represents, again, a concerted effort by a number of key players in 
dual committees and in both the House and the Senate.
  What's important about this legislation is it does make some changes, 
and you have heard from Members who have had horrendous pipeline 
incidents in their communities and their States, people have lost their 
lives, there's been extreme property damage, and we have also impacted 
in a negative fashion the environment.
  And what we do here in this legislation are some simple things. 
First, we enhance the inspections. We set standards of better 
inspections for pipelines. We hold pipeline operators accountable, and 
that's important. People must be responsible for their actions, and we 
double the fines if there is negligence. There will be a penalty to pay 
because the damage has been incurred. And, again, we have seen some of 
the bad results. What we hope for is good results from this, again, 
that we can keep energy flowing and provide it for consumers.
  That's good news for consumers, that's good news for the industry at 
a time when we should be hiring and employing people in this important 
energy activity, and it's good news for, again, safe transport and safe 
jobs in an important industry in our country.
  So I'm pleased that we've come together. We have, I think, achieved 
and set an example for the Congress when Congress's reputation is, oh, 
very low, and that's giving us high marks. And when people express 
their disappointment in the inability of Congress to act, we are 
acting. Because this is being resolved without conflict and without, 
again, huge disruption in the congressional process, it probably won't 
get much attention. But it is in fact, and it is indeed a very 
important seep forward.
  I'm grateful for all of those who have come together and worked and 
made this an example of how Congress can and should work for the 
benefit of the American people.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).
  Ms. SPEIER. I thank the gentleman from Washington State for yielding 
me time.
  Fifteen months ago, in my district, a gas pipeline exploded and 
killed eight of my constituents. Thirty-eight homes were destroyed, 
many more were severely damaged, and many were victims that sat in burn 
centers for months; and I visited them. It was a horrific scene. It 
destroyed that community in so many respects; and yet like a phoenix, 
it has risen above it. This bill is really very personal to me because 
I lived with those experiences with all of those constituents.
  There are a couple of things that must be said today. The chairwoman 
of the NTSB, the National Transportation Safety Board, said in their 
final report: Our investigation revealed that for years, the operator 
exploited weaknesses in a lax system of oversight. We also identified 
regulators that placed a blind trust in the companies that they were 
charged with overseeing to the detriment of public safety.
  As a result of their report, they made 30 safety recommendations, 
many of them identified as urgent, to address issues in recordkeeping, 
information sharing, and pipeline testing. The NTSB report said it 
highlighted the fact that the problem has been under-regulation, not 
over-regulation, of the pipeline industry. For too long the pipeline 
operators have essentially written the rules for their industry.
  Well, this bill takes a very important step forward in improving 
pipeline safety regulation , and I endorse it; but there is more that 
must be done. And ironically, now in California, because of this 
horrific accident, the residents in California will have better 
safeguards than any other State in this country because of actions 
taken by the State legislature and the California Public Utilities 
Commission that will require, moving forward, that automatic and remote 
shutoff valves be placed in high-consequence areas and in seismic 
areas, not just on new pipeline and not just on new pipeline that they 
find economically feasible to place these automatic and remote shutoff 
valves. This is a key component that was not included in the 
legislation.
  And I must tell you, when you saw that ball of fire raging for 90 
minutes, an hour and a half, before they were able to turn off the gas, 
that is something that has to be addressed on a national basis. It's 
been addressed now in California; and I urge us, as we move forward, to 
address it on a national level, as well.
  The NTSB also recommended requiring all pipelines be configured to 
allow for inline inspection tools called ``smart pigs.'' I didn't know 
what a smart pig was before this happened, but I do now. They are also 
recommending requiring that older pipeline, in particular, be subject 
to smart pigging. This is critical to make sure that they have not 
endured corrosion, that they have not been spiked and the like.
  So moving forward I hope that we will take the steps necessary not 
just to support this measure and to have it signed into law but to make 
it clear that our work is still not done.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I have no further speakers; so I will continue to 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, in closing, just let me say a 
few words.
  First off, I want to be sure I thank Ms. Brown of Florida, the 
ranking member of the subcommittee, as well as Mr. Rahall, the ranking 
member of the full Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, as 
well as my colleagues on the majority side of the aisle on the 
committee, and, of course, on the Energy and Commerce Committee for the 
work that we all did to make this bill happen.
  This is the third version of the pipeline safety bill that I 
personally have worked on going back to 2001. Each time Congress has 
reauthorized the pipeline safety bill, we have done so by learning 
lessons from the previous 4 years, incorporating those lessons into the 
legislation and taking forward steps to make the use of pipelines and 
the transportation of liquid fuel and gas safer.
  The third thing I just want to point out is that each year--2002, 
2006 and 2011--each year of the passage of the pipeline safety bill, 
the bills have been bipartisan and garnered much support both in the 
House and in the Senate. We are likely to see that in the House, and I 
certainly urge the Senate to take this bill up this week and pass it 
with bipartisan support, as well.
  Finally, let me just say to this body that I would urge this body to 
support this bill and to pass H.R. 2845. I want to thank Mr. Shuster 
for his cooperation in this effort as well.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with the words 
of the gentleman from Washington. He is really one of the experts in 
Congress when it comes to pipeline safety, and it has been my pleasure 
to work with him on this bill.
  As I said earlier, I'm very, very proud of the work that's gone into 
this bill on both sides of the aisle. This truly is a bipartisan 
agreement and a bicameral agreement, and I think we can all be proud of 
the product we've produced and look forward to it being passed into 
law, because pipelines are the safest way to move the gas and the 
hazardous products that this Nation needs to fuel the economy. And this 
important legislation does improve safety. It enhances the reliability 
and provides the regulatory certainty so that the owners and operators 
of pipelines will make the investments in their systems that will 
create jobs across America.
  So I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 2845; and with that, I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2845, the Pipeline 
Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011.
  This legislation, which enjoys broad bipartisan support in both 
Chambers of Congress, seeks to improve the safety of our nation's 
pipeline infrastructure, an issue that is important to all Americans.
  I want to call attention to the pipeline safety research and 
development portions of this bill--specifically a small but important 
interagency program that I worked on in my capacity as longstanding 
Member of and current Chairman of the House Science, Space, and 
Technology Committee.
  Focused R&D aimed at accident prevention and protecting the integrity 
of our pipeline infrastructure is critical to ensuring that our 
nation's energy supplies are transported safely.

[[Page H8339]]

  As an original co-sponsor of the 2002 pipeline safety legislation, I 
led efforts to establish the existing R&D program. This program has 
been productive and efficient in carrying out pipeline safety R&D. In 
particular, the public-private partnership model that the Department of 
Transportation uses to administer the program has served to leverage 
both Federal agency and private sector resources and expertise.
  I want to thank my colleagues for working with me on this legislation 
to make modest--but important--changes to the current program.
  In particular, I want to thank Chairman Mica for working with me to 
ensure that the program maintains its historical public-private cost-
sharing structure, and recognizes the important contributions of the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology in pipeline safety 
research, development, and standards.
  With respect to cost-sharing, I was particularly concerned with a 
recent decision by the Secretary of Transportation that sought to 
eliminate non-Federal sources of funding toward pipeline safety R&D.
  This decision threatened to undermine the program's ability to 
leverage taxpayer dollars to advance new pipeline safety technologies, 
and in doing so would have also prevented the government from taking 
advantage of the highly specialized pipeline expertise that is found 
only in industry.
  I am pleased that H.R. 2845 requires a thirty percent, program-wide, 
cost share from non-Federal sources, which will help ensure that this 
program continues to achieve its purpose without placing an unnecessary 
burden on the taxpayer.
  I thank my colleagues again for their efforts and urge passage of 
this valuable legislation.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2845, the 
``Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 
2011''.
  This legislation will make significant improvements to pipeline 
safety, and is a prime example of how good public policy is formed when 
all sides come together and work toward producing a strong package from 
day one.
  Pipelines have a critical place in our nation's infrastructure; more 
than 2.5 million miles of pipelines deliver energy to homes and 
businesses across America. From the gasoline that fills the cars we 
drive to the diesel that fuels the trucks that deliver food to local 
grocery stores to the natural gas that heats our homes, pipelines make 
it possible.
  Unfortunately, due to the volatile nature of the products that 
pipelines deliver, incidents involving gas and hazardous liquid 
pipelines can and have had disastrous consequences.
  On July 26, 2010, a 30-inch pipeline owned by Enbridge Energy 
Partners LLP ruptured and released more than one million gallons of oil 
into Talmadge Creek and the Kalamazoo River just one mile south of 
Marshall, Michigan. The Kalamazoo River flows into Lake Michigan. The 
spill devastated the local environment and wildlife, uprooted 
homeowners that live near the creek and river, and exposed local 
communities to noxious and toxic substances before Enbridge even raised 
alarm. Nearly a year and one-half later, Enbridge is still excavating 
oil-contaminated soil and weathered oil from the river banks; submerged 
oil recovery work has been suspended for the winter but will resume in 
2012.
  A little over a month after the Enbridge spill, on September 9, 2010, 
an intrastate natural gas transmission pipeline owned by the Pacific 
Gas and Electric Company, ruptured in a residential area in San Bruno, 
California. The released natural gas ignited, resulting in a fire that 
destroyed 38 homes and damaged 70 others. Eight people were killed, 
many were injured, and many more were evacuated from the area.
  The bill before us today addresses many of the recommendations that 
were issued by the National Transportation Safety Board in accident 
reports that followed these and other pipeline incidents. For example, 
the bill holds pipeline operators accountable to a maximum of one hour 
to report a release of hazardous liquid or gas resulting in an 
incident. As the natural gas disaster in San Bruno, California 
underscores--every minute that passes following a release of hazardous 
liquid or gas from a pipeline is one less minute that responders have 
to protect the community and the surrounding environment. In fact, CNN 
was reporting the incident six hours before PG&E reported it to the 
National Response Center and Federal investigators.
  Additionally, the bill raises civil penalties for each pipeline 
safety violation from $100,000 to $200,000 and the maximum civil 
penalty from $1,000,000 to $2,000,000. The maximum penalties for 
violations of pipeline safety regulations under current law have not 
been increased in almost a decade. Adequate levels of penalties are 
necessary to deter unsafe operating practices by the pipeline industry, 
particularly in serious cases involving injuries, fatalities, and 
significant environmental damage. The bill further clarifies that civil 
penalties are applicable to obstruction of an investigation.
  The bill also:
  Requires pipeline operators to install automatic shut-off valves on 
all new and replaced pipeline so that the volume of product released as 
a result of a rupture would be limited;
  Requires the Secretary of Transportation to evaluate and then issue 
regulations to expand integrity management beyond high-consequence 
areas; establish performance standards for leak detection systems; and 
require hazardous liquid pipeline operators to install leak detection 
systems that meet those performance standards;
  Requires pipeline operators, in response to the San Bruno incident, 
to report to the Department of Transportation any time their facilities 
exceed maximum allowable operating pressure, and to conduct tests to 
confirm the material strength of previously untested gas transmission 
pipelines in high-consequence areas;
  Prevents States that receive one-call grants from exempting 
municipalities, State agencies, or their contractors from one-call 
(damage prevention) notification requirements;
  Requires the Secretary to ensure offshore hazardous liquid gathering 
lines and hazardous liquid gathering lines located within the inlets of 
the Gulf of Mexico are subject to the same safety standards and 
regulations as other hazardous liquid gathering lines;
  Beginning one year after the date of enactment, prohibits the 
Secretary from issuing guidance or a regulation that incorporates by 
reference any documents or portions thereof unless those documents or 
portions thereof are made available to the public, free of charge, on 
an Internet Web site;
  Requires the Department of Transportation, DOT, to develop and 
implement a protocol for consulting with Indian tribes to provide 
technical assistance for the regulation of pipelines; and
  Increases the level of pipeline safety inspectors at DOT.
  In sum, H.R. 2845 is a step in the right direction when it comes to 
pipeline safety, and I urge its adoption.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my strong 
support for H.R. 2845, the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty and 
Job Creation Act of 2011.
  I want to thank Chairmen Mica and Shuster and Ranking Member Rahall 
for their bipartisan effort in bringing a good bill to the Floor today 
that will truly improve the safety of our nation's pipeline systems and 
the communities they serve.
  Bipartisan bills are not easy to come by these days in Washington, 
and I'm proud to say that we worked with both sides on the Energy & 
Commerce Committee and our counterparts in the Senate to develop a 
compromise bill. This legislation accomplishes our goal of improving 
safety and education without limiting the industry's ability to serve 
its customers.
  Our Subcommittee held numerous hearings over the last two Congresses 
with all the stakeholders in the pipeline industry to see what we could 
be doing better to detect and prevent spills. Our strong oversight of 
PHMSA and the pipeline industry helped develop the bill we have on the 
floor today.
  This legislation makes numerous positive changes to the regulation of 
the pipeline industry and addresses many of the problems we've 
discovered with recent devastating spills.
  The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty and Job Creation Act of 
2011 makes major improvements to pipeline safety by increasing 
penalties for safety violations, mandating new shut-off valve 
installation for all new and repaired pipes, limiting exemptions to 
call before you dig requirements, updating the national pipeline 
mapping system, evaluating current integrity management plans, 
providing important pipeline information to the public free of charge, 
training state and local government personnel, adding ten PHMSA 
inspectors, and studying pipeline permitting, transporting non-
hazardous liquids, and the integrity of cast iron gas pipelines.
  As we continue to debate the construction of the Keystone XL 
Pipeline, implementation of this legislation will help ensure that the 
construction and operation of this new pipeline will be held to the 
highest safety standards.
  This legislation is government at its best. It was developed in a 
bipartisan manner through comprehensive committee hearings and 
oversight, and close collaboration with the industry and other 
stakeholders, including states and advocacy groups.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2845, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

[[Page H8340]]



                          ____________________