[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 14411-14413]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                SUPPORTING NATIONAL PIPELINE SAFETY DAY

  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 484) expressing support for 
designation of June 10th as ``National Pipeline Safety Day''.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The text of the resolution is as follows:

                              H. Res. 484

       Whereas there are more than 2,000,000 miles of gas and 
     hazardous liquid pipelines in this country operated by over 
     3,000 companies;
       Whereas these pipelines play a vital role in the lives of 
     people in the United States by delivering the energy we need 
     to heat our homes, drive our cars, cook our food and operate 
     our businesses;
       Whereas in the past decade significant new pipelines have 
     been built to help move North American sources of oil and gas 
     to refineries and markets;
       Whereas, on June 10, 1999, a hazardous liquid pipeline 
     ruptured and exploded in a park in Bellingham, Washington, 
     killing two 10-year-old boys and a young man, destroying a 
     salmon stream, and causing hundreds of millions of dollars in 
     damages and economic disruption;
       Whereas in response to this June 10th pipeline tragedy 
     Congress passed significant new pipeline safety regulations 
     in the form of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 
     and the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and 
     Safety Act of 2006;
       Whereas in the past decade the U.S. Department of 
     Transportation's Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety 
     Administration, with support from a diverse group of 
     stakeholders, has instituted a variety of important new rules 
     and pipeline safety initiatives such as the Common Ground 
     Alliance, pipeline emergency training with the National 
     Association of State Fire Marshals, and the Pipelines and 
     Informed Planning Alliance;
       Whereas even with all these new pipeline safety 
     improvements, in 2008 alone there were still 274 significant 
     pipeline incidents causing over $395,000,000 in property 
     damage and uncounted economic disruption;
       Whereas even though pipelines are the safest method to 
     transport huge quantities of fuel, pipeline incidents such as 
     the 1994 pipeline explosion in Edison, New Jersey that left 
     100 people homeless, the 1996 butane pipeline explosion in 
     Texas that left 2 teenagers dead, the 2000 pipeline explosion 
     near Carlsbad, New Mexico, that killed 12 people in an 
     extended family, the 2004 pipeline explosion in Walnut Creek, 
     California, that killed 5 workers, and the 2007 propane 
     pipeline explosion in Mississippi that killed a teenager and 
     her grandmother are still occurring;
       Whereas these millions of miles of pipelines are still out 
     of sight and therefore out of mind for the majority of 
     individuals, local governments, and businesses, leading to 
     pipeline damage and general lack of oversight;
       Whereas greater awareness of pipelines and pipeline safety 
     can improve public safety;
       Whereas a ``National Pipeline Safety Day'' can provide a 
     focal point for creating greater pipeline safety awareness; 
     and
       Whereas June 10, 2009, is the 10th anniversary of the 
     Bellingham, Washington, pipeline tragedy that was the impetus 
     for many of the above-mentioned safety improvements and would 
     be an appropriate day to designate as ``National Pipeline 
     Safety Day'': Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
       (1) supports the designation of National Pipeline Safety 
     Day;
       (2) encourages State and local governments to observe the 
     day with appropriate activities that promote pipeline safety;
       (3) encourages all pipeline safety stakeholders to use this 
     day to create greater public awareness of all the 
     advancements that can lead to even greater pipeline safety; 
     and
       (4) encourages individuals across the Nation to become more 
     aware of the pipelines that run through our communities and 
     do what they can to encourage safe practices and damage 
     prevention.


[[Page 14412]]


  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Larsen) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.


                             General Leave

  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and 
extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on House 
Resolution 484.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Washington?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, today I rise to ask the House of Representatives to 
support the designation of June 10, tomorrow, as National Pipeline 
Safety Day. There are more than 2 million miles of gas and hazardous 
liquid pipelines in our country. Pipelines play a vital role in the 
lives of the American people by delivering the energy we need to heat 
our homes, to drive our cars, to cook our food, and to operate our 
businesses.
  In the past decade, significant new pipelines have been built to help 
move oil and gas to refineries and to markets. These pipelines are 
invisible to most people and, therefore, are out of sight and are out 
of mind. This can lead to pipeline damage and to a general lack of 
government oversight.
  On June 10 of 1999, a pipeline leak caused a massive explosion in my 
district in Bellingham, Washington. The rupture released more than a 
quarter of a million gallons of gasoline into Whatcom Creek. The 
gasoline ignited, sending a fireball racing down the creek, which 
killed two 10-year-old boys and an 18-year-old man. The two boys--
Stephen Tsiorvas and Wade King--were playing in the creek on a summer 
day, near their homes, and 18-year-old Liam Wood had just graduated 
from high school and was fly fishing for trout.

                              {time}  1845

  Previous generations certainly ask themselves, Where were you when 
President Kennedy was shot? But in my district, people literally ask 
the question and know the answer to, Where were you when the pipeline 
exploded? It had that much of an impact in my district.
  In response to this tragedy and several other pipeline explosions 
across the country, Congress passed legislation to strengthen pipeline 
safety regulations. The 2002 Pipeline Safety Improvement Act increased 
penalty fines, improved pipeline testing timelines, provided 
whistleblower protection, and allowed for State oversight. In 2006, 
Congress reauthorized the 2002 law by passing the Pipeline Inspection, 
Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act, or the PIPES Act. Since that 
day in June, we've made significant progress in ensuring the safety of 
our Nation's pipelines. The frequency of so-called ``high-consequence 
events'' to pipelines has diminished almost 35 percent in the last 10 
years. Due to the integrity management program required by the new law, 
pipeline operators have made extensive repairs to their pipelines that 
otherwise would have led to future accidents.
  The 811 One-Call program now provides a number that people can call 
before they dig to make sure that they won't hit a pipeline when they 
do dig. ``Call 811, the One-Call program.'' And Congress has 
significantly increased the number of pipeline inspectors in the field. 
However, we must remain vigilant. That's why I have introduced House 
Resolution 484, a resolution to recognize tomorrow, June 10, 2009, the 
10-year anniversary of the Bellingham pipeline explosion, as National 
Pipeline Safety Day. My resolution encourages individuals, State and 
local governments, and pipeline safety stakeholders to use this day to 
create greater public awareness of pipelines and pipeline safety. It 
has the support of Washington State Governor Christine Gregoire, the 
Whatcom County Council, the Pipeline Safety Trust, the Pipeline 
Association for Public Awareness, the American Gas Association and the 
American Public Gas Association.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I do encourage my colleagues to support 
House Resolution 484.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
  I would like to express my support for House Resolution 484, 
designating June 10 as National Pipeline Safety Day, and yield such 
time as he may consume to my colleague from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-
Balart).
  Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the 
gentleman for his generosity with the time.
  I rise in support of this resolution, designating National Pipeline 
Safety Month. Mr. Speaker, pipelines obviously play an important role 
in our society through the operation of our homes, our businesses, and 
the delivery of energy to drive our cars, to cook our food, to keep us 
warm in the winter and cool in the summer. It is an undeniable reality 
that energy affects all aspects of our lives, and all Americans need it 
and depend on energy.
  That's why it's unfortunate that some in the majority and in the 
administration, frankly, are proposing this cap-and-trade legislation 
that many are calling cap-and-tax legislation that would dramatically 
increase the cost of energy for all Americans, every single American. 
Estimates say that this bill could increase a cost to a family of four 
close to $3,000 a year, $2,937 a year, to be exact, and raise 
electrical rates on families by 90 percent after adjusting for 
inflation, boost gasoline prices by 74 percent on American families, 
and natural gas prices by 54 percent. If that were not bad enough, it 
would also put American businesses at a huge competitive disadvantage 
with their competitors from other countries that don't pursue that kind 
of legislation, be it China or India.
  Now let's take a look at what some key players in the administration 
have recently stated about this legislation, some facts. For example, 
Peter Orszag, as CBO director and currently as the OMB director, 
testified to the Ways and Means Committee on September 18, 2008. He 
said, ``Decreasing emission would also impose costs on the economy. 
Much of those costs will be passed along to consumers in the form of 
higher prices for energy and energy-intensive goods.''
  Mr. Orszag's written testimony stated that the average annual 
household cost was $1,300. That's for a 15 percent cut in 
CO2 emissions, which, by the way, happens to be 80 percent 
less than the cut sought by this administration.
  Another fact. On March 17, 2009, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, 
testifying before the Science Committee said, ``The cap-and-trade bill 
will likely increase the cost of electricity.''
  Another fact I would like to bring up today, Energy Secretary Steven 
Chu said advocating adjusting trade duties as a ``weapon'' to protect 
U.S. manufacturing, because otherwise, again, U.S. manufacturing would 
be put at a huge disadvantage. He said establishing a carbon tariff 
would help ``level the playing field'' if other countries haven't 
imposed mandatory reductions in carbon emissions; again, referring to 
the fact that it would put our industry at a huge, huge disadvantage. 
Again Mr. Chu said, ``If other countries don't impose a cost on carbon, 
then we will be at a disadvantage,'' and he went on to say, ``and we 
would look at considering duties to offset that cost.'' But the 
legislation doesn't have those in the bill.
  Again, what we are looking at then is, the United States will impose 
a self-inflicted wound to put our industry and our country at a huge 
disadvantage, increasing costs of energy to all consumers in this great 
country of ours at a time in particular when everybody is hurting.
  Last month on May 21, the current CBO director testified before the 
House Budget Committee and said, ``CBO has been very clear that a cap-
and-trade system or a carbon tax would raise the price of carbon 
emissions, and the cost would ultimately be borne by households.'' 
Again, it's not rocket science,

[[Page 14413]]

Mr. Speaker. And again, ``It's also widely understood that if we raise 
the price of carbon emissions and our trading partners do not, then 
that creates an additional challenge for carbon-emitting industries.'' 
Those are his words. I added that part about the rocket science, to be 
fair; but those are his words.
  So it's fitting that we are now here talking about pipelines and 
energy. I just hope that we don't forget the big picture as well and 
that we don't impose this huge cost on our consumers and those who use 
gasoline and turn on lights, like everybody does, that manufactures 
using energy, like every industry does, that we don't put them at a 
huge disadvantage.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am sure the parents of the 
three young men who died in the explosion would be very interested to 
hear the thoughts of the gentleman from Florida on energy.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I believe this resolution highlights the need 
to properly maintain pipelines and encourages the development of 
pipeline safety programs. I support the passage of this resolution and 
urge my colleagues to do the same.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Petri and 
Mr. Mica as well as Mr. Young, Mr. Oberstar, and Ms. Brown for all 
their help in putting this resolution together and getting it to the 
floor today. I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 484.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 484, 
introduced by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen), which 
expresses support for designating June 10th as ``National Pipeline 
Safety Day''.
  Pipelines have a critical place in our national infrastructure. The 
national pipeline network of over 2.2 million miles efficiently 
delivers gasoline, natural gas, oil, and other essential energy 
products across the country each day. However, because of the volatile 
nature of the products they deliver, if pipelines are not properly 
cared for, or they are carelessly tampered with, there can be serious 
consequences.
  That is what occurred in 1986 in Mounds View, Minnesota, when a 
Williams pipeline ruptured. Vaporized gasoline combined with air and 
liquid gasoline flowed along neighborhood streets. About 20 minutes 
after the accident occurred, the gasoline vapor was ignited when an 
automobile entered the area. Fire spread rapidly along the path of the 
liquid gasoline, killing a woman and her daughter and severely burning 
another victim. According to accident investigators, there were known 
deficiencies in the cathodic protection applied to the first 10 miles 
of the pipeline and Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 484, 
introduced by the corrosion to the weld seams. Employees also had 
failed to shut-off the manually operated gate valve until one and half 
hours into the spill.
  According to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), had the 
valve been remotely operable or had remote-operated valves been 
installed on the line at the time of the accident, the pipeline could 
have been shut down by the dispatcher soon after the failure was 
detected, thereby decreasing substantially the amount of product 
released into the neighborhood. Ignition of the fuel may not have been 
prevented; however, the extent and severity of the damage could have 
been reduced.
  The NTSB first identified the need for rapid shutdown of failed 
pipelines to limit the release of product following a pipeline rupture 
in a 1970 study, entitled ``Effects of Delay in Shutting Down Failed 
Pipeline Systems and Methods of Providing Rapid Shutdown''. Since then, 
a number of accidents that highlight the need to reduce the release of 
hazardous gases or liquids have occurred. In 1995, the NTSB recommended 
that the Department of Transportation's Research and Special Programs 
Administration (RSPA) expedite requirements for rapid shutdown of 
failed pipeline segments on high-pressure pipelines in high-consequence 
areas.
  However, RSPA failed to act on the NTSB's recommendations, opting 
instead to further study the issue. That prompted Congress to pass the 
Accountable Pipeline Safety and Partnership Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-304), 
which required the Secretary of Transportation to assess the 
effectiveness of remotely operated valves and to prescribe standards, 
within two years of enactment, for installation of the valves based on 
that assessment. The regulations were not issued until 2001--too late 
for the victims of the 1999 hazardous liquid pipeline explosion in 
Bellingham, Washington.
  The June 10, 1999, explosion caused the release of about 237,000 
gallons of gasoline into a creek that flowed through Whatcom Falls Park 
in Bellingham, Washington. The gasoline ignited, sending a fireball 
about 1.5 miles down the creek, which took the lives of two 10-year-old 
boys, Stephen Tsiorvas and Wade King, and an 18-year-old young man, 
Liam Wood. Eight additional inhalation injuries occurred, a single-
family residence and the city of Bellingham's water treatment plant 
were severely damaged, and the wildlife in Whatcom Creek was completely 
destroyed.
  Investigators found, among other things, that Olympic Pipe Line had 
no remote-operated shut off valves on the line, which could have 
prevented the release of hundreds of thousands of gasoline and the loss 
of three young lives. Following the Bellingham accident, RSPA ordered 
the pipeline company to install an automatic check 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. Again, a case of too little, too late.
  Pipeline accidents, such as the ones in Mounds View and Bellingham, 
are not isolated incidents. According to the Pipeline and Hazardous 
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), which now oversees the safety 
of our nation's pipeline infrastructure, 2,888 significant pipeline 
incidents occurred between 1999-2008, resulting in 173 fatalities, 632 
injuries, and $2.7 billion in property damage.
  In response to these incidents, Congress passed the Pipeline Safety 
Improvement Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-355), which increased penalties for 
violations of safety standards; developed qualification programs for 
employees who perform sensitive tasks; strengthened pipeline testing 
requirements; required government mapping of the pipeline system; 
established a public education program for communities that live around 
pipelines; and enhanced whistleblower protections.
  In 2006, Congress furthered these pipeline safety efforts by passing 
the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act (P.L. 
109-468), which required development of an integrity management program 
for distribution pipelines; implemented long-standing NTSB safety 
recommendations on the installation of excess flow valves, development 
of hours-of-service standards for pipeline employees, and adoption of 
safety standards for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) 
systems; and increased pipeline inspection and enforcement personnel.
  Despite these significant measures, much work remains to be done. 
PHMSA has not implemented many of the mandates from the 2006 Act. Over 
the next several months, as we look to reauthorization of the pipeline 
safety program in fiscal year 2011, we will work with PHMSA to ensure 
full implementation of the Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Res. 
484.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen) that the House suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 484.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________