Ensuring Patient Safety: Oversight of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplant System

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                STRENGTHENING AMERICAN ENERGY: A REVIEW5                      OF PIPELINE SAFETY POLICY6=======================================================================78                                HEARING910                               BEFORE THE1112                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY1314                                 OF THE1516                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE17                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES1819                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2021                             FIRST SESSION2223                               __________2425                             JULY 22, 20252627                               __________2829                           Serial No. 119-343031[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3233     Published for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce34                   govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy35                        energycommerce.house.gov3637                              __________3839                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4061-637 PDF                     WASHINGTON : 202641=======================================================================4243                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE4445                        BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky46                                 Chairman47ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio                FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey48H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia           Ranking Member49GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida            DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado50RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina       JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois51EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia    DORIS O. MATSUI, California52GARY J. PALMER, Alabama              KATHY CASTOR, Florida53NEAL P. DUNN, Florida, Vice          PAUL TONKO, New York54    Chairman                         YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York55DAN CRENSHAW, Texas                  RAUL RUIZ, California56JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania             SCOTT H. PETERS, California57RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas           DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan58RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               MARC A. VEASEY, Texas59TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois60RUSS FULCHER, Idaho                  NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California61AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas                DARREN SOTO, Florida62DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee         KIM SCHRIER, Washington63MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa       LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts64KAT CAMMACK, Florida                 LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas65JAY OBERNOLTE, California            ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York66JOHN JAMES, Michigan                 JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts67CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon                  TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana68ERIN HOUCHIN, Indiana                ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey69RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina          KEVIN MULLIN, California70LAUREL M. LEE, Florida               GREG LANDSMAN, Ohio71NICHOLAS A. LANGWORTHY, New York     JENNIFER L. McCLELLAN, Virginia72THOMAS H. KEAN, Jr., New Jersey73MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio74GABE EVANS, Colorado75CRAIG A. GOLDMAN, Texas76JULIE FEDORCHAK, North Dakota77                                 ------7879                           Professional Staff8081                     MEGAN JACKSON, Staff Director82                SOPHIE KHANAHMADI, Deputy Staff Director83               TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Minority Staff Director84                         Subcommittee on Energy8586                         ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio87                                 Chairman88RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas, Vice     KATHY CASTOR, Florida89    Chairman                           Ranking Member90GARY J. PALMER, Alabama              SCOTT H. PETERS, California91RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey92TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 KEVIN MULLIN, California93AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas                JENNIFER L. McCLELLAN, Virginia94DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee         DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado95MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa       DORIS O. MATSUI, California96JOHN JAMES, Michigan                 PAUL TONKO, New York97CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon                  MARC A. VEASEY, Texas98RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina          KIM SCHRIER, Washington99LAUREL M. LEE, Florida               LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas100NICHOLAS A. LANGWORTHY, New York     ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, New York101MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio               JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts102GABE EVANS, Colorado                 FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex103CRAIG A. GOLDMAN, Texas                  officio)104JULIE FEDORCHAK, North Dakota105BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky (ex106    officio)107                             C O N T E N T S108109                              ----------110                                                                   Page111Hon. Robert E. Latta, a Representative in Congress from the State112  of Ohio, opening statement.....................................     1113    Prepared statement...........................................     4114Hon. Kathy Castor, a Representative in Congress from the State of115  Florida, opening statement.....................................     6116    Prepared statement...........................................     8117Hon. Brett Guthrie, a Representative in Congress from the118  Commonwealth of Kentucky, opening statement....................    10119    Prepared statement...........................................    11120Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the121  State of New Jersey, opening statement.........................    13122    Prepared statement...........................................    16123124                               Witnesses125126Andrew J. Black, President and Chief Executive Officer, Liquid127  Energy Pipeline Association....................................    18128    Prepared statement...........................................    20129    Answers to submitted questions...............................   124130Sarah C. Miller, President and Chief Executive Officer, GPA131  Midstream Association..........................................    27132    Prepared statement...........................................    29133Bill Caram, Executive Director, Pipeline Safety Trust............    33134    Prepared statement...........................................    35135    Answers to submitted questions...............................   126136Jim Moriarty, Executive Vice President, General Counsel,137  Corporate Secretary, and Chief Policy and Risk Officer,138  Chesapeake Utilities Corporation...............................    47139    Prepared statement...........................................    49140    Answers to submitted questions...............................   129141142                           Submitted Material143144Inclusion of the following was approved by unanimous consent.145List of documents submitted for the record.......................   103146Letter from Erin Kurilla, Vice President of Advocacy and147  Operations, American Public Gas Association, to Mr. Guthrie, et148  al.............................................................   104149Letter of July 22, 2025, from Robin Rorick, Vice President,150  Midstream, American Petroleum Institute, to Mr. Guthrie, et al.   108151Complaint of April 22, 2025, United States v. Panhandle Eastern152  Pipe Line Company, L.P., District Court for the Northern153  District of Texas, Dallas Division.............................   115154155   STRENGTHENING AMERICAN ENERGY: A REVIEW OF PIPELINE SAFETY POLICY156157                              ----------158159                         TUESDAY, JULY 22, 2025160161                  House of Representatives,162                            Subcommittee on Energy,163                          Committee on Energy and Commerce,164                                                    Washington, DC.165    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:31 a.m. in166room 2322, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Robert E. Latta167(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.168    Members present: Representatives Latta, Weber, Palmer,169Allen, Balderson, Pfluger, Harshbarger, Miller-Meeks, Fry, Lee,170Rulli, Evans, Goldman, Fedorchak, Guthrie (ex officio), Castor171(subcommittee ranking member), Peters, Menendez, Mullin,172McClellan, DeGette, Matsui, Tonko, Veasey, Schrier, Fletcher,173Ocasio-Cortez, Auchincloss, and Pallone (ex officio).174    Staff present: Ansley Boylan, Director of Operations; Clara175Cargile, Professional Staff Member; Andrew Furman, Professional176Staff Member; Sydney Greene, Director of Finance and Logistics;177Calvin Huggins, Clerk, Energy; Megan Jackson, Staff Director;178Sophie Khanahmadi, Deputy Staff Director; Mary Martin, Chief179Counsel; Ben Mullaney, Press Secretary; Chris Sarley, Member180Services/Stakeholder Director; Peter Spencer, Senior181Professional Staff Member, Energy; Matt VanHyfte,182Communications Director; Jane Vickers, Press Assistant; Perry183Hamilton, Minority Member Services and Outreach Manager;184La'Zale Johnson, Minority Intern; Kristopher Pittard, Minority185Professional Staff Member; Emma Roehrig, Minority Staff186Assistant; Kylea Rogers, Minority Policy Analyst; Andrew187Souvall, Minority Director of Communications, Outreach, and188Member Services; and Tuley Wright, Minority Staff Director,189Energy.190    Mr. Latta. The Chair calls the Subcommittee on Energy to191order, and the Chair recognizes himself for 5 minutes for an192opening statement.193194OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT E. LATTA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN195                CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO196197    And welcome to today's hearing, ``Strengthening American198Energy: A Review of Pipeline Safety Policy.'' And I want to199thank our witnesses for participating today.200    We will examine the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety201Administration's--PHMSA--pipeline safety program. PHMSA is a202Department of Transportation agency tasked with developing and203enforcing Federal safety regulations for the Nation's onshore204pipeline infrastructure and the transportation of hazardous205materials. The witnesses before us represent different segments206of PHMSA's regulated community and can provide important207perspectives on the reauthorization of PHMSA.208    Pipelines are the safest and most efficient mode of209transportation for oil, natural gas, liquid energy products,210and hazardous materials, and they play an instrumental role in211delivering the products that drive our Nation's economy212forward. The agency has about 3.3 million miles of pipelines213under its purview. In order to ensure these pipelines are214operated in a safe and reliable manner, PHMSA partners and215coordinates with States to administer pipeline safety programs216and inspect infrastructure within a State's boundaries.217    PHMSA was last authorized in Protecting Our Infrastructure,218Pipelines, and Enhancing Safety Act, the PIPES Act of 2020,219through fiscal year 2023. It is my belief that we can work in a220bipartisan fashion in this Congress with our House and Senate221colleagues to reauthorize PHMSA to continue carrying out its222mission and associated duties. This subcommittee has a223responsibility to ensure PHMSA maintains a strong focus on224safety and operates within its statutory authorities.225    The PIPES Act of 2020 included several statutorily mandated226rulemakings that never fully got out of the gate under the227previous administration. Today the subcommittee will examine228implementation of the PIPES Act to ensure that PHMSA is on229track to carry out congressional intent in a cost effective and230workable manner.231    Additionally, the subcommittee will examine new challenges232and opportunities for pipeline safety. For example, the233replacement of aging infrastructure must be a top priority for234PHMSA, States, and pipeline operators, but it presents costs235and operational challenges. Especially as energy demand is236projected to increase significantly in the immediate future,237the upgrading of our natural gas network must be prioritized to238ensure the safe transportation of natural gas and other239important energy sources and products.240    While substantial progress has been made in replacing aging241pipes, there's still work to be done. I look forward to the--242hearing from our witnesses on how PHMSA can help address the243remaining 1 percent of the iron distribution pipes.244    American innovations and net--new technologies like245artificial intelligence technology also present opportunities246to bolster the quality of risk assessments and advance safety247towards our collective goal of zero incidents. However, these248technologies will also pose challenges to information and249operational security. It is important that PHMSA250reauthorization gives the agencies the tools needed to have an251effective approach for the opportunities and challenges ahead.252    In his confirmation hearing last week, Paul Roberti,253President Trump's nominee for PHMSA Administrator, committed to254pursuing opportunities to utilize new, cost-effective255technology to enhance safety. The subcommittee hopes to256collaborate with PHMSA and pipeline operators in this endeavor.257    As we look at the reauthorization that must prioritize the258improvements of the agency's core responsibility, which is259safety. I am concerned that the previous administration260advanced extraneous priorities and set safety onto the side.261However, President Trump's administration has recommitted to262this critical mission, and I believe this committee can produce263a reauthorization that maintains safety as a cornerstone of264pipeline safety--of the pipeline safety program.265    Pipelines are imperative to public safety and the energy266security of our Nation. I look forward to hearing from the267pipeline operators today as we build on American energy268leadership.269    And I want to thank again our witnesses for being here270today.271    [The prepared statement of Mr. Latta follows:]272    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]273274    Mr. Latta. And I yield back and at this time recognize the275gentlelady who--the--from the 14th District of Florida, who is276the vice--or, I am sorry, the ranking member of the277subcommittee, for 5 minutes for an opening statement.278279  OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. KATHY CASTOR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN280               CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA281282    Ms. Castor. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good283morning, everyone.284    Today's hearing is an important reminder of the role of285this committee, of ensuring the safety of the public and our286energy infrastructure.287    Congress created the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials288Safety Administration in 2004, and we charged it with ensuring289the safety of nearly 3.3 million miles of pipelines across the290country.291    Now, pipelines can be dangerous. There are many hundreds of292pipeline safety incidents every year, many that result in death293and injury. That is why PHMSA's work in setting safety294standards and inspecting interstate pipelines is critical. For295years, Democrats have been focused on ensuring that PHMSA has296adequate resources and a strong professional workforce.297    After a number of deadly accidents and the growing298magnitude of aged, leaky, and unsafe pipelines, Congress passed299the PIPES Act of 2020 to improve the safety of gas gathering300lines and pipelines while also addressing wasteful and301dangerous methane gas leakages. Congress followed on in 2021 in302the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and allocated $1303billion over 5 years for natural gas distribution,304infrastructure safety, and modernization grants to help replace305leak-prone pipelines.306    I noticed in your opening, Mr. Chairman, you said the Trump307administration is very committed to safety. Oh, no. To the308contrary, the Trump administration has halted those safety and309modernization grants earlier this year. But multiple lawsuits310were filed by States, nonprofits, and local communities311challenging the freeze. And on April 17 a Federal judge ordered312the Trump administration to reinstate funding, ruling that the313freeze was arbitrary and capricious, and violated the law. The314Department of Energy and EPA were required to resume315disbursement of already awarded safety grant funds.316    The Trump administration also is failing to follow through317on other pipeline safety initiatives, even though the Congress318has been clear that we expect PHMSA to conduct robust reviews319of pipeline maintenance and operation plans. When Congress320reauthorized PHMSA's Office of Pipeline Safety in the321bipartisan PIPES Act, we required PHMSA to consider protection322of the environment when reviewing proposed safety rules,323including methane pollution leak detection. The former324administration completed a final leak detection rule, but325President Trump arbitrarily demanded that PHMSA withdraw it.326    That is not smart. Climate risk, cost, and harms are327growing in severity, and PHMSA's work is only becoming more328important. Climate-fueled extreme weather events can cause329pipeline leaks and explosions, especially in high-risk States330like Texas and Louisiana.331    We must ensure that all impacts are considered in siting,332design, repair, and maintenance of oil and gas infrastructure,333including pipelines. Unfortunately, rather than follow the law334mandated by Congress, the Trump administration's PHMSA is335taking a laissez faire approach to pipeline safety, and this is336dangerous and costly.337    To add insult to injury, the Trump administration has338gutted PHMSA over the past 7 months. Enforcement actions by the339agency are at record lows, just 5 cases in the first 3 months340of this year, compared to 66 cases during the same time period341in 2017. And get this: More than half of the agency's senior342leadership has left.343    We are seeing this kind of sabotage over and over again344from the Trump administration, and it is really putting345Americans at risk. For example, my neighbors back home in346Florida are less safe this hurricane season because of cuts at347the National Weather Service. They have ended vital satellite348forecasting initiatives and have left offices understaffed.349    At FERC, the President has asked the existing Chair, who he350appointed the first time around, to resign early and then351nominated a new chair who doesn't have any energy background.352These actions jeopardize FERC independence and make our energy353systems less safe.354    At the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, President Trump has355fired a safety commissioner and pushed Executive orders that356threaten NRC independence. And just last week, Trump fired357nearly every member of the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review358Board. So at every opportunity that--Trump is cutting corners359with safety, and undermining energy independent--agency360independence.361    And folks, this is not normal, and I urge my Republican362colleagues on this committee to stand up to this reckless363gutting of independent agency experts and abdication of the364laws that keep us safe. Americans want safe and affordable365energy, but we know we are going to be grappling with the366higher costs of the Big, Ugly Bill. I hope we can talk a little367bit about that today.368    Mr. Chairman, hope springs eternal. Nevertheless, this369could be the start of a good bipartisan dialog to reauthorize370pipeline safety and address some of the issues in this371committee.372    [The prepared statement of Ms. Castor follows:]373    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]374375    Ms. Castor. So thank you very much, and I yield back.376    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady's time has expired,377and the Chair now recognizes the chair of the full committee,378the gentleman from Kentucky's 2nd District, for 5 minutes for379an opening statement.380381 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRETT GUTHRIE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN382           CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY383384    Mr. Guthrie. Thank you, Chairman Latta, and thank you to385our witnesses for being here today. We appreciate it.386    Pipelines are critical to the safe transportation and387distribution of oil, natural gas, and other energy products,388along with hazardous liquid products. As demand for energy is389projected to skyrocket over the next decade, we must ensure our390Nation's pipeline safety laws are ready to meet the moment.391    The Energy and Commerce Committee plans an important--plays392an important role in the reauthorizing of Pipeline and393Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's, PHMSA, pipeline394safety program. Under the new leadership of Chair Latta and395myself, I hope we can work in a bipartisan manner. As my friend396from Florida said, we will work to do that in this effort.397    PHMSA oversees the U.S. energy pipeline network of over 3.3398million miles of onshore pipelines. To accomplish this task,399PHMSA partners with States to ensure the entire network is400safely operated and maintained. According to a 2019 PHMSA401report, pipelines delivered 180 million gallons of energy per402safety incident, while trucks delivered only 55 million gallons403of safety incident, and trains only--trucks 55, States--trains404only 50.405    Over the last 20 years, serious pipeline incidents have406been reduced by approximately 34 percent. To continue this407downward trend, PHMSA must operate within its statutory408authority and maintain its focus on public safety.409Unfortunately, under the previous administration PHMSA strayed410from this core responsibility, focusing more on environmental411agendas than safety. The current PHMSA has a busy docket,412promulgating and finalizing statutory-mandated regulations,413updating regulations that are decades old, and refocusing the414agency on its essential mission.415    Today's hearing will provide an important foundation the416committee--as the committee examines the status of outstanding417rulemaking from the PIPES Act of 2020, ways to close penalty418loopholes for pipeline vandalism, opportunities to streamline419processes, and the role emerging technologies can play in420mitigating risk and increasing efficiencies across the pipeline421system.422    I believe a major consideration for the future of pipeline423safety is ensuring adequate capacity is available. As operators424work to replace aging infrastructure, we must have capacity425available to take pipelines temporarily offline for upgrades426and repairs while still meeting the needs of American427consumers.428    Pipelines are essential to the energy security of our429country. I look forward to working with Chair Latta and Ranking430Members Pallone and Castor to strengthen our Nation's pipeline431network.432    [The prepared statement of Mr. Guthrie follows:]433    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]434435    Mr. Guthrie. And thank you, and I will yield back.436    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back. And seeing437if the ranking member of the full committee is here--OK.438    Well, at this time what we will do, we will informally pass439on the ranker's opening statement and go right to our witnesses440today. But this concludes the Member opening statements, and441the Chair reminds Members that, pursuant to the committee442rules, all Members' opening statements will be made part of the443record.444    We want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today445and taking the time to testify before the subcommittee. Each446witness will have the opportunity to give an opening statement,447followed by a round of questions from the Members.448    Our witnesses for today are Mr. Andrew Black, the president449and CEO at the Liquid Energy Pipeline Association; Ms. Sarah450Miller, president and CEO at GPA Midstream; Mr. Bill Caram, the451executive director of Pipeline Safety Trust; and Mr. Jim452Moriarty, the executive vice president and general counsel at453the Chesapeake Utilities Corporation.454    And again, as I mentioned, the Chair appreciates all of our455witnesses appearing before us today, and you will each be given4565 minutes for an opening statement.457    And just a quick update on our mics here, that you have to458pull them up close so they can hear you. Press the button, and459hopefully you will see a little light come on. Sometimes it is460kind of difficult to see.461    Oh, and you know what? Before we do, since we formerly462passed on the ranker, we will hear from the ranker first and463then go right to the witnesses. So the gentleman from New464Jersey is recognized for 5 minutes for an opening statement.465466OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE467            IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY468469    Mr. Pallone. I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. I came right up from470the other hearing, but I guess they are all happening too471quickly. Let me see what I have here.472    It has been 661 days since the last pipeline safety473reauthorization expired, so I am glad we are here today because474there is a lot to talk about.475    Pipeline safety risks are just as prevalent as ever. But476since President Trump took office, enforcement actions against477pipeline operators by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials478Safety Administration, or PHMSA, have fallen off a cliff. In479fact, it has been so long since we have had a hearing, I480haven't used the word PHMSA much. It is not because pipelines481have somehow magically gotten safer since January 20, but482instead it is because the Trump administration is once again483prioritizing profits for their favorite industries over the484safety of the American people. And that is why Trump is--485forcing out the public servants that helped to keep our486pipelines safe is so wrong.487    Nearly all of PHMSA's top staff have left the agency, and488dozens of employees have either been forced out or been paid to489leave. And the Trump administration is simply letting the490agency bleed out talent that was vital to keeping Americans491safe.492    And the Trump administration isn't just haphazardly493enforcing law at PHMSA. Sometimes it is not following the law494at all. The last reauthorization signed by President Trump495required that PHMSA issue a final rule improving leak detection496in gas pipelines. PHMSA finalized that rule in January, in the497final days of the Biden administration, but the Trump498administration clawed it back from the printer before it could499even be published. It did the same thing with the proposed rule500on the safety for carbon dioxide pipelines which was required501by pipeline safety legislation over a decade ago.502    So PHMSA has even ignored basic transparency requirements503that it publish monthly updates on its progress on finalizing504rules and regulations required by law. All of this is clear505that the Trump administration has no interest in following the506law, and that is why it is so important that this committee507worked together on pipeline safety reauthorization not just508across the aisle here, but with our colleagues on the House509Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Senate510Commerce Committee.511    We must ensure that pipelines are safe and that the512administration and pipeline operators are following the law. If513Republicans want to pass a pipeline safety reauthorization514package this Congress, I would urge them not to follow the515process that committee Republicans used last Congress.516Committee Republicans insisted on a legislative hearing and517markup on a bipartisan bill that cut authorized funding levels518by nearly 20 percent and had several poison-pill provisions519completely unrelated to safety. They also refused to engage520with the Transportation Committee on compromise legislation521and, as a result, never even moved a bill to the floor.522    In short, Republicans should not follow that same playbook.523As we look to reauthorize the pipeline safety program, it is524important that we focus on safety. Committee Republicans should525not try to gut bipartisan programs we established in our last526bill. It is also critical that we give PHMSA the resources and527tools we know it needs to keep us all safe.528    So finally, because this is our first Energy Subcommittee529hearing since Republicans passed their Big, Ugly Bill, I wanted530to briefly talk about the harm that that bill will cause531American families.532    We heard testimony from countless Republican witnesses533throughout the first half of this year begging Republicans not534to cut vital tax incentives for clean energy or energy535affordability programs from the Inflation Reduction Act. They536also pleaded with Republicans to stay away from cutting the537efforts by the Loan Program Office to keep our energy538competitive, especially looking at nuclear power. And539Republicans ignored all of these experts' pleas.540    And now, as a result, power bills for American families541will rise by up to $400 per year, reliability will be542undermined, the risk of blackouts will go up, and the climate543crisis will get worse.544    So Republicans' dangerous energy agenda is basically545pickpocketing working families to give handouts to the rich,546including the big oil and gas corporations who are among the547only ones that stand to benefit from it.548    Now, I just wanted to say, Mr. Chairman, this pipeline549safety issue is very important to me. We had an incident many550years ago when I was in Congress. We had a major explosion in551our district. Certainly in New Jersey we are all very concerned552about pipeline safety. And we--you know, and so I just think553that, you know, ignoring all this and just cutting all the554people, and getting all the--getting rid of all the people that555work there, it is just a terrible thing.556    I don't understand why pipeline safety can't be bipartisan.557It always was in the past. Maybe I am old-fashioned and, you558know, nothing is bipartisan anymore. But the bottom line is559this really should be. I mean, people care about it, and we560should care about it, as well.561    [The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]562    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]563564    Mr. Pallone. With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.565    Mr. Latta. Thank you very much. The gentleman yields back566the balance of his time. And at this time, again, we will go567back to our witnesses.568    And as I mentioned, just pull the mic up close. Press that569button, and you will see that when you hit the 4-minute mark it570will go yellow with the lights up front, which means you have a571minute to conclude your statement, and the red is at 5 minutes.572    So with that, Mr. Black, you are recognized for 5 minutes573for your opening statement.574575 STATEMENTS OF ANDREW J. BLACK, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE576 OFFICER, LIQUID ENERGY PIPELINE ASSOCIATION; SARAH C. MILLER,577     PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, GPA MIDSTREAM578 ASSOCIATION; BILL CARAM, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PIPELINE SAFETY579  TRUST; AND JIM MORIARTY, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, GENERAL580    COUNSEL, CORPORATE SECRETARY, AND CHIEF POLICY AND RISK581           OFFICER, CHESAPEAKE UTILITIES CORPORATION582583                  STATEMENT OF ANDREW J. BLACK584585    Mr. Black. Thank you, Chairman, Ranking Member. I am Andy586Black, president and CEO of the Liquid Energy Pipeline587Association. We have over 50 member companies delivering over58820 billion barrels annually across a nearly 230,000-mile589network of pipelines.590    America is blessed with abundant energy supplies. Expanding591American energy production will send new supply to market and592pressure prices downward.593    The Energy and Commerce Committee has an important role in594ensuring our pipeline network is safe, allowing us to595confidently expand our energy infrastructure.596    Liquid energy pipelines deliver transportation fuels like597gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel that families, commuters,598businesses, and travelers use to drive and fly where they need599to go. Pipelines deliver feed stocks like crude oil, ethane,600and butane to make everything from plastics to pharmaceuticals,601cosmetics, paints, fabrics, and fuels. Rural home and602agricultural fuels like propane delivered by pipeline before603traveling locally by truck heat rural homes and farms, dry604crops after harvest, and keep livestock barns warm throughout605the winter.606    As this committee considers the role of pipeline607infrastructure and what changes to make to Federal pipeline608safety laws, it is important to remember that pipelines are the609safest way to deliver energy. More than 99.999 percent of crude610oil and petroleum products delivered by pipeline reaches its611destination safely. A report prepared for Congress--to Congress612by PHMSA found that pipelines were 13 times safer than both613trains and trucks. Current pipeline incident statistics also614show pipeline safety is improving further. According to615publicly available PHMSA data, total liquid pipeline incidents616are down 13 percent over the last 5 years. Incidents impacting617people and the environment are also down 13 percent over the618last 5 years. And when comparing incidents to volume delivered,619the decrease is even more striking, with liquid pipeline620incidents per barrel delivered down 33 percent over those 5621years.622    These safety metrics are available in the Pipeline623Performance Report and Pipeline Excellence Strategic Plan. In624this report you can see how the liquid pipeline industry is625addressing key challenges like corrosion, leak detection, and626geohazards. You can see how operators are improving pipeline627safety by harnessing new technologies, artificial intelligence,628safety management systems, and recommended practices.629    Declining pipeline incidents over the last 5 years supports630a measured approach to reauthorizing pipeline safety laws631without major changes or mandates. LEPA does believe there is a632role for Congress to encourage PHMSA to leverage technology for633pipeline safety, support American energy development through634safe pipelines, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of635PHMSA programs.636    Congress can do more to modernize pipeline safety programs.637Key parts of PHMSA's safety regulations are over 20 years old638and do not reflect the latest advances in safety, technology,639or know-how. High-tech analytic tools like an MRI or an640ultrasound you find in the doctor's office are available for641pipeline safety. Analytic methods like machine learning and642artificial intelligence can help operators digest data to show643when a pipeline might be leaking or when it might need644maintenance.645    This administration is off to a good start, promoting long-646needed reforms to PHMSA. PHMSA has announced changes that will647improve transparency and issued several notices on important648proposals. PHMSA announced regulatory actions to improve649special permits, update incident reporting thresholds, and650integrate remote sensing technologies for monitoring rights-of-651way patrols. LEPA believes Congress can make some of these652reforms permanent and provide the agency additional personnel653with STEM expertise and pipeline operations experience.654    Six of the specific pipeline safety reauthorization655provisions LEPA would welcome include: reform PHMSA's special656permit program permanently to impose decision deadlines and657limit unrelated requirements; strengthen penalties for pipeline658safety violations that impair operational facilities or damaged659construction sites; fulfill the 2020 congressional mandate of a660safety program for idled pipelines; reauthorize without661extraneous conditions a technology demonstration pilot program;662authorize a voluntary information-sharing program to convene663stakeholders to collaborate on safety initiatives similar to664FAA's successful program; and authorize risk-based inspections665of in-service breakout tanks to reduce unnecessary greenhouse666and air pollutant emissions, worker safety threats, and667hazardous waste. More recommendations are listed in my written668testimony.669    Thank you again for the committee's support of pipeline670energy infrastructure and the opportunity to testify you--671before you today on the benefits of pipelines, including their672safety. Thank you.673    [The prepared statement of Mr. Black follows:]674    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]675676    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much.677    And Ms. Miller, you are now recognized for 5 minutes for an678opening statement.679680                  STATEMENT OF SARAH C. MILLER681682    Ms. Miller. Chairman Latta, Ranking Member Castor, and683members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to684testify today on behalf of GPA Midstream Association. My name685is Sarah Miller, and I serve as the president and CEO of GPA686Midstream, an organization that has represented the U.S.687midstream energy sector since 1921.688    Safety of employees, contractors, and communities is the689highest priority for GPA Midstream member companies. Our nearly69050 corporate members are responsible for the safe and efficient691gathering, processing, transporting, and marketing of natural692gas, natural gas liquids, crude oil, and refined products. Our693members directly employ over 57,000 individuals and indirectly694support more than 600,000 jobs across the U.S. economy. In 2023695GPA Midstream members contributed over $206 billion in economic696impact, operating more than 506,000 miles of pipeline and over697365 natural gas processing facilities.698    Our members are an invisible link between raw natural gas699and crude oil produced at the wellhead and distribution of700products to consumers for heating, electricity production,701transportation, steelmaking, fertilizer production, plastics,702high-tech devices, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and much more.703    The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that704U.S. production and consumption of natural gas and petroleum,705which includes NGLs, will remain strong through at least 2050.706Similarly, Rice University's Baker Institute projects natural707gas and crude will sustain a steady share of the global energy708mix also through 2050. That is to say that it remains essential709to continue our focus on pipeline safety for existing and new710pipeline infrastructure to assure we can meet energy demands in711the U.S. and around the world.712    GPA Midstream members support reauthorization of PHMSA's713pipeline safety programs, with the goal to ensure pipelines714remain the safest method for transporting affordable, reliable,715and sustainable energy while also facilitating innovation and716efficiency. We seek legislative and regulatory predictability717and certainty to enable prudent investment decisions for the718benefit of communities and investors alike. Our members719advocate many goals for the reauthorization of PHMSA's pipeline720safety program, including several reflected in this committee's721bill from the last congressional session.722    Specifically, our members appreciate improved due process723enforcement--in enforcement matters, reform of the special724permit program, strengthening penalties for those who damage725infrastructure, and the recognition of opportunity for726innovation and alternative technologies. Today I offer three727recommendations especially meaningful to our members.728    First, we urge elimination of duplicative oversight of in-729plant plant gas piping. Hazardous liquid in-plant gas piping--I730am sorry. Hazardous liquid in-plant piping is exempt by law731from PHMSA's regulation, but the regulation of in-plant--of gas732in-plant piping is not. In-plant piping is within the733jurisdiction of other robust safety programs such as OSHA's734Process Management Standards. Aligning the treatment of gas and735liquid and in-plant piping would eliminate regulatory736redundancy without compromising safety.737    We are grateful to PHMSA for recognizing such redundancy738and issuing a notice to proposed rulemaking to codify an739exception for in-plant piping systems into the gas pipeline740safety regulations. We also seek legislative certainty for the741elimination of such redundancy.742    Second, in recent years there have been more rulemakings743aimed at gathering pipelines. The physical and commercial744operations of gathering pipelines can differ greatly from745transmission pipelines. Therefore, we request the Gas Pipeline746Advisory Committee facilitate greater input from gathering747pipeline operators for more effective gathering pipeline safety748regulations.749    Third, we encourage the use of more performance-based750measures and less prescriptive regulations to achieve safety751goals. Performance-based measures consider relevant operating752conditions and assess risks to achieve meaningful safety753priorities. Performance-based measures will also facilitate a754longer-term reauthorization period for PHMSA's programs, as755they allow for evolving technological advancement and best756practices proven by time and experience to achieve safety.757    In conclusion, GPA Midstream is committed to working with758Congress and PHMSA to ensure the continued safety and759reliability of our Nation's energy infrastructure. We760appreciate your leadership on this important issue and stand761ready to serve as a resource as you move forward with762reauthorization.763    Thank you.764    [The prepared statement of Ms. Miller follows:]765    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]766767    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much for your opening768statement.769    Mr. Caram, you are recognized for 5 minutes.770771                    STATEMENT OF BILL CARAM772773    Mr. Caram. Good morning, Chair, Ranking Member, and members774of the subcommittee. I am Bill Caram, executive director of the775Pipeline Safety Trust, which was created after the 1999 Olympic776pipeline tragedy in Bellingham, Washington, that killed three777boys. We serve as an independent national watchdog over the778pipeline industry and its regulators.779    On average, a significant pipeline incident occurs every 32780hours in America, nearly one every day. Since this781subcommittee's last pipeline safety hearing last year, in782January 2024, 18 people have been killed and 45 hospitalized783from pipeline incidents. The past 2 years have been the784deadliest in nearly 15 years, with 30 deaths, including a 5-785year-old in Missouri, a 15-year-old in Utah, and an 82-year-old786pastor's wife in Mississippi. Our shared goal of zero incidents787feels unreachable when we haven't yet been able to prevent788these tragic deaths.789    Looking at pipeline safety metrics over the last 10 years790or longer doesn't show that we are making progress. The number791of significant incidents each year remains frustratingly flat.792Other metrics, such as incidents impacting people or the793environment, display a slight downward trend, so slight that794statisticians would say could easily be due to chance rather795than actual improvement. And while we did make meaningful796progress on fatalities in the previous decade, the last decade797shows a slight upward trend, though like other metrics not798statistically significant.799    Pipeline failures don't just kill and injure people and800damage ecological areas; they cost billions and disrupt energy801supplies. Over the last 10 years, pipeline incidents have been802reported by operators to cost over $6 billion. Incidents on803pipelines such as Colonial's refined products pipeline that804supplies the East Coast with 45 percent of its liquid energy805have put critical energy reliability at risk.806    But the same solutions that save lives and protect our807environment also strengthen our economy and energy security.808Making a meaningful difference on pipeline safety will require809three elements: improved regulations, effective enforcement,810and widespread adoption of pipeline safety management systems,811or PSMS.812    In many cases, Congress has hamstrung PHMSA from developing813effective regulations. Provisions in the pipeline safety814statute like the extra burdensome cost benefit requirement and815the nonapplication clause make it extremely difficult for PHMSA816to develop lifesaving regulations.817    Despite these limitations, there are ways to make a818meaningful difference on pipeline safety. For example, as819recently recommended by the NTSB, natural gas alarms or methane820detectors would undoubtedly save lives. Incidents in Japan have821declined by 90 percent alongside the adoption of these alarms.822    Another idea is fire shut-off valves. These simple devices823automatically close when exposed to heat, preventing gas from824fueling house fires. They are inexpensive, maintenance-free,825and easily installed.826    We need modernized regulations for carbon dioxide and827hydrogen blended pipelines. Congress has incentivized this828infrastructure without addressing the regulatory and research829gaps that put communities on the front lines of significant830safety risks. This year marks 5 years since the Denbury carbon831dioxide pipeline failure in Satartia, Mississippi, that sent832nearly 50 people to the hospital. That harrowing night laid833bare many of the risks and regulatory shortfalls with these834pipelines.835    Increasing authorized resources to PHMSA is also necessary.836Not only has the agency been chronically underfunded, but the837additional miles of jurisdictional pipe and the potential838build-out of carbon dioxide and hydrogen pipelines demands an839increase in resources from Congress both to the agency and,840just as significantly, to the State programs.841    But even the best regulations are meaningless without842robust enforcement. Recently, enforcement case initiations have843declined drastically, down nearly 65 percent compared to this844point in the first Trump administration. According to a recent845PHMSA report to Congress on the adoption of PSMS, or Pipeline846Safety Management Systems, among gas distribution operators,847while most pipeline mileage is owned by operators committed to848PSMS, only half of all operators have made this commitment. To849improve safety we need industrywide adoption: all systems, all850operators, large and small.851    As you discuss how to move forward on authorizing PHMSA's852pipeline safety program and make improvements to the law, I853implore you to think of the empty seats at dinner tables across854the country because of pipeline failures. Eighteen dinner855tables are missing someone just since last year's pipeline856safety hearing alone. Please ensure PHMSA meets its857responsibility to the American people. Thank you.858    [The prepared statement of Mr. Caram follows:]859    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]860861    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much for your opening862statement.863    And Mr. Moriarty, you are recognized for 5 minutes for an864opening statement.865866                   STATEMENT OF JIM MORIARTY867868    Mr. Moriarty. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Latta,869Ranking Member Castor, and members of the subcommittee. I am870Jim Moriarty, executive vice president and general counsel of871Chesapeake Utilities Corporation. I want to thank you for the872opportunity to appear today.873    We are a diversified energy delivery company headquartered874in Delaware, with service offerings that include natural gas875gathering, transmission, and distribution, as well as propane,876mobile compressed natural gas services, and electricity877generation and distribution. Our company has operated for more878than 160 years and today owns and operates assets in 9 States,879serving over 440,000 customers with over 1,200 dedicated880employees.881    Natural gas infrastructure plays an integral role in the882national security and economic sovereignty of our country, and883the demand for this domestic resource will only increase in the884coming years. As a key part of this Nation's pipeline885infrastructure, our subsidiaries distribute natural gas to more886than 330,000 customers through over 9,000 miles of pipeline. We887also operate over 700 miles of transmission pipelines, a888liquefied natural gas storage facility, and a renewable gas889transportation fleet.890    Across the country, varying local and State mandates have891created a complex and patchwork regulatory landscape that892complicates planning, increases cost, and ultimately affects893consumer choice and pipeline safety. A unified Federal approach894modeled after laws already enacted in 27 States that protect895the customer's right to choose natural gas as their primary896energy source would provide clarity, prevent regulatory897fragmentation, and ensure that safe, reliable, and affordable898domestic energy remains accessible to all Americans.899    Natural gas utility distribution pipelines are the final900critical link in the delivery chain as we engage daily with901American families, communities, and businesses, as well as902State authorities who oversee pipeline safety today. We strive903to make life better for the communities in which we live and904serve. Accordingly, pipeline safety is and must be our number-905one priority. For these reasons we are focused on continually906enhancing our culture of operational safety and risk907mitigation.908    Every year our company, like many others, invests in our909pipeline systems, spending hundreds of millions of dollars to910enhance safety, reliability, and accessibility. For example,911our distribution system has been modernized by eliminating912cast-iron and bare steel. Across our service areas we are913performing advanced leak detection and incorporating a variety914of new and innovative technologies to consistently prevent915safety incidents.916    Chesapeake Utilities and other natural gas distribution917companies support the following principles in the upcoming918pipeline safety reauthorization legislation.919    First, streamline processes to meet energy demands on920schedule by ensuring policies reflect the growing need for921natural gas and the critical role that pipeline infrastructure922plays.923    Two, limit safety incidents, property damage, and924environmental impacts caused by unintended excavation damages.925    Three, strengthen criminal penalties on those who sabotage926or intentionally damage pipeline facilities.927    Four, identify emerging technologies that improve safety.928    Five, study safe operations for natural gas and hydrogen929blending and distribution systems.930    And six, establish a 5-year reauthorization period so that931PHMSA and the industry have sufficient time to complete and932assess improvements.933    Our industry has proved we can expand natural gas delivery934while also improving safety. Doing so enables us to continue to935meet the needs of our customers and the communities that we936proudly serve by delivering safe, affordable, and reliable937domestic energy so that no one is left behind.938    Thank you.939    [The prepared statement of Mr. Moriarty follows:]940    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]941942    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much for your opening943statement, and that will conclude our opening statements from944our witnesses. And again, I want to thank you all for being945with us today. And at this time I will recognize myself for 5946minutes to our--questions to our witnesses.947    Ms. Miller, do you believe that PHMSA's primary mission as948a regulator should be safety?949    Ms. Miller. I do.950    Mr. Latta. And would you explain why pipelines have a net951positive effect on the environment?952    Ms. Miller. Well, as you've heard from other witnesses--and953first I should say thank you, Chairman, for the question--but954as you have heard from other witnesses as well, pipelines are955the cleanest and safest way to move energy. The demand for956affordable, reliable, and safe, sustainable energy sources is957growing, and natural gas is abundant in the United States. So958with appropriate regulatory policy, natural gas can--and the959pipelines that the midstream operators design, install, and960operate can be the way that safe, affordable, reliable energy961is delivered to the communities that need it.962    I would note that the U.S. Energy Information963Administration has reported that natural gas results in fewer964emissions for--than using coal or petroleum products to deliver965the same energy. Therefore, when you use natural gas through966pipelines in place of coal or other petroleum products, you are967actually enabling communities worldwide to have reliable,968affordable energy sources to enable a higher-quality standard969of living safely.970    And our members--on top of all that, our members are971prioritizing safety, and they are looking for ways to ensure972that their pipelines do not have leaks, lost or emitted gas--973lost gas is actually lost profit, lost value for our members,974so they are not only incentivized to ensure that natural gas975pipelines are operated safely, but they also deliver an976environmental benefit because it is the right thing to do, but977also because they are financially incentivized to ensure that978that product stays in the pipe.979    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you.980    Mr. Moriarty, 40 percent of electric generation in the981United States comes from natural gas. Electricity demand in the982United States is projected to increase more than 25 percent in983the next 5 years, in part because of the race for AI and the984offshoring of manufacturing. That means we are going to need985more natural gas, which will require significant infrastructure986build-out, including the expansion of pipeline infrastructure.987Could you elaborate on how pipeline constraints impact and988ultimately jeopardize safety?989    Mr. Moriarty. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.990    States that allow prompt regulatory recovery of the costs991for the replacement and relocation of pipelines will accelerate992the upgrading of aging infrastructure. We have these regulatory993mechanisms in Florida and in Maryland and Delaware.994    Also, excavation damage is the primary source of995distribution pipeline incidents, and hampers operations and996efforts to upgrade aging infrastructure. States that have997strong excavation damage prevention programs and enforcement998typically experienced lower rates of damage to distribution999pipelines.1000    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you.1001    Mr. Black, the PIPES Act of 2020 recognized the value of1002using new technologies to bolster both efficiency and safety.1003However, DOE's implementation of the program had many1004nonstatutory requirements that ultimately deterred1005participation. Would you elaborate on what some of those1006nonstatutory hurdles were and are?1007    Mr. Black. Thank you for your leadership on this issue in1008the 2020 PIPES Act and in last Congress' bill, and we hope that1009we can continue to work on this issue.1010    The technology demonstration pilot program gives us an1011opportunity to demonstrate how new technologies can improve1012pipeline safety. PHMSA went beyond the safeguards that Congress1013suggested and required technology pilot program applicants to1014use a special permit process and to put those before a NEPA1015review, none of which had ever been done for similar types of1016applications like that, so nobody used it.1017    Mr. Latta. Could you--just pardon for the interruption. Why1018would they do that if they had never done it before?1019    Mr. Black. It confounded us. I don't know.1020    Mr. Latta. But, you know, there is another kind of a theme1021that went through. Why aren't we prosecuting these cases?1022Because obviously, we need to hire penalties for, you know,1023attacks on pipelines. What is happening out there?1024    If I could maybe just--I got 36 seconds left, but are we1025not prosecuting? Or what is happening in these cases out there?1026    Mr. Black. Well, there are criminal penalties in Federal1027pipeline safety law for damaging or destroying pipelines, but1028we have incidents that don't lead to immedi]ate damage or1029discovery that fall under loopholes. So we think you need to1030address issues like valve turning that can cause pressure1031buildups, or torching pipelines, or shooting high-powered1032rifles through pipelines, all of which have happened. We would1033like to work with you to close those loopholes and deter1034attacks against pipelines.1035    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much. And my time has1036expired, and I now recognize the gentlelady from Florida, the1037ranking member of the subcommittee, for 5 minutes for1038questions.1039    Ms. Castor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1040    Mr. Caram, you highlight the erosion of the commitment to1041pipeline safety in your--throughout your testimony, and that1042includes the professional workforce at PHMSA. Is that right?1043    Mr. Caram. Yes, we have heard of retirements at PHMSA.1044    Ms. Castor. And that--I understand that the Community1045Liaison department, which engages members of the public, has1046gone from 13 employees to just 3 people who are now responsible1047for engaging the entire country. Can you explain to us what the1048real-world impacts of the reduction in professional expert1049workforce at PHMSA means for the safety of the public?1050    Mr. Caram. Sure, thank you for the question.1051    Unfortunately, we don't know fully. We haven't heard1052official word out of PHMSA as exactly the extent of the1053retirements and the reductions in force. So we are going off of1054what has been reported in the media or what is available on1055their website, which hasn't been fully updated. But we have1056noticed that the Community Liaison department went from, as you1057mentioned, 13 down to 3, and that includes the manager of the1058department, and that is 3 people in charge of, you know, public1059engagement with members of the public across the entire country1060who live among and alongside the over 3 million miles of1061pipeline, more miles of pipeline than paved roads, which I hope1062is obvious that is not nearly enough.1063    And we have also heard, you know, most of the leadership1064staff is gone. That is a lot of years of experience that has1065been drained out. We have also heard a lot of staff from the1066standards and rulemaking team is--has retired, as well.1067    Ms. Castor. I am also very concerned with the escalating1068costs and risk driven by the heating planet and climate change.1069In June the National Transportation Safety Board issued a final1070report on the 1-point-million-gallon pipeline oil spill in the1071Gulf of Mexico in 2023, which caused $30 million in damage. In1072the report the NTSB specified that it was the result of land1073movement related to hurricane activity.1074    And this is fresh in my mind because I saw significant1075damage to energy infrastructure following Hurricanes Helene and1076Milton in the Tampa Bay area.1077    Does PHMSA currently have any regulations or guidelines,1078Mr. Caram, for pipeline safety related to extreme weather1079events, flooding, and more intense hurricanes?1080    Mr. Caram. Yes, thank you for that question. So we call all1081of those geohazards, these geologic threats to pipeline1082integrity, and they can be a result of extreme weather events.1083And in addition to hurricanes we have seen pipeline failures1084after large rainfall, you know, of historic levels and things1085like that.1086    There is nothing specific in PHMSA regulations----1087    Ms. Castor. Well, what can----1088    Mr. Caram [continuing]. About geohazards.1089    Ms. Castor. What can Congress do if we are going to update1090regulations to better incorporate climate resilience practices?1091    Mr. Caram. Mandate that PHMSA adopt geohazard-specific1092regulations. There is industry guidance out there, there's best1093practices by operators, and a lot to go on to start writing1094those regulations now.1095    Ms. Castor. There are also a few elephants in the room1096right now when it comes to pipeline safety, and one of them is1097the hatchet that the administration is taking to just basic1098funding of pipeline safety and PHMSA. Round this, your1099testimony, out. What are--what can we anticipate at PHMSA in1100regard to the safety of the public if these kind of draconian1101cuts, the work of professional experts and then their overall1102budget, is enacted into law?1103    Mr. Caram. Well, PHMSA is already an underresourced,1104understaffed agency before this. And it was--it is really an1105all-hands-on-deck, committed to safety, so it is really hard to1106imagine cuts not impacting their ability to be an effective1107safety regulator.1108    These--the types of results that we would expect to see1109from these cuts and lower of--and lowering of enforcement and1110regulatory activity are--I would imagine will be long term. I1111don't think you will see an overnight change. But if we were to1112see a change, unfortunately, I think it is long term, and we1113will be seeing it----1114    Ms. Castor. In the statistics that you highlighted early to1115say, well, maybe--we really haven't seen a significant1116improvement in reduction in deaths and injuries.1117    Is that likely to continue if we are not able to properly1118fund and support pipeline safety across America?1119    Mr. Caram. I hope that is not the case, but I do believe1120that a strong, effective regulator is what keeps pipelines--is1121part of what keeps pipelines safe. And lacking that, I worry1122about the results.1123    Ms. Castor. Thank you, I yield back.1124    Mr. Latta. Thank you very much. The gentlelady's time has1125expired, and the Chair now recognizes the chairman of the full1126committee for 5 minutes for questions.1127    Mr. Guthrie. Thanks, Mr. Chair, and sorry for popping up1128and down. We have another hearing going on downstairs.1129    So, Mr. Black, I will first ask you this: How does PHMSA1130enforcement act as a deterrent to unsafe operations?1131    Mr. Black. We are glad that this PHMSA has said that its1132top enforcement priority is pipeline safety, not other topics.1133And our country needs confidence in our pipeline network and in1134our pipeline safety oversight.1135    Enforcement acts as a deterrent against unsafe operations,1136and so pipeline operators are expecting that PHMSA is enforcing1137pipeline safety rules for the betterment of safety.1138    Mr. Guthrie. OK, because we need confidence because I have1139had in my area I know--if you look at a map of pipelines,1140people would be just shocked how many pipelines we have. But1141whenever there is a new movement forward, there is always a big1142public relations campaign against the pipeline about safety. So1143we need confidence in it so people will know.1144    And then when you tell people, you know, there are1145pipelines everywhere, and they don't realize that, but that has1146kind of become a new thing to keep us from moving energy1147around, is that people are--pipelines. And we absolutely want1148them to be safe and people have to confidence in that. So1149thanks.1150    So Ms. Miller, when PHMSA rulemakings go beyond the1151appropriate or statutory-mandated scope, how does that impact1152an operator's ability to prioritize safety?1153    Ms. Miller. Thank you for the question, Chairman Guthrie.1154    Operators will comply with PHMSA's regulations. And so when1155PHMSA's rules regulate matters other than to achieve safety1156priorities, that means that resources that alternatively could1157have been devoted to those safety priorities are spent in other1158ways. And this issue is not only relevant to the operators, but1159it is also relevant to PHMSA resources.1160    We appreciate that Congress mandates PHMSA's scope of1161responsibility and that the 2004 authorizing statute for PHMSA1162made clear that safety was to be its highest priority. And we1163welcome, to the extent that there is any ambiguity about that1164priority, that Congress can reaffirm PHMSA's focus on safety.1165    Mr. Guthrie. Thank you.1166    Mr. Moriarty, what are the barriers to addressing the1167remaining distribution lines that need to be upgraded?1168    Mr. Moriarty. Thank you very much, Chairman Guthrie, for1169the question.1170    In our view, pipeline infrastructure is the safest means1171for transporting energy, and more must be built to meet the1172growing demand. Just one example is our Ohio subsidiary worked1173very closely with AEP to build--it is called Aspire Energy1174Express--to construct a new intrastate pipeline in central Ohio1175to support an on-site electric power generation at a new fuel1176facility center serving a data center.1177    We continue to work on solutions to these problems. We work1178closely with our elected representatives in each of our1179regulatory agencies to address concerns. In our view, everybody1180is welcome to the table to raise any issues they have. But what1181we are asking for is just prompt, fair, and balanced1182consideration, and then issuance of regulations so that we all1183can comply with those.1184    Mr. Guthrie. OK, thank you.1185    So, Mr. Black, how can pipeline operators use AI and other1186technologies like smart pigs to improve safety throughout their1187operations?1188    Mr. Black. We are really excited about----1189    Mr. Guthrie. The smart pigs?1190    Mr. Black. Yes, and how it can improve pipeline safety.1191    Mr. Guthrie. Explain a smart pig.1192    Mr. Latta. Well, you might--your mic there.1193    Mr. Black. There we go.1194    Mr. Latta. There we go.1195    Mr. Guthrie. Explain a smart pig, as well.1196    Mr. Black. A smart pig is a pipeline inspection device that1197travels on the inside of a pipeline, pushed by the liquid1198product, collecting information. It collects terabytes of data1199about the inside of a pipeline. So AI could use--could be used1200to process that information to help identify more issues before1201they become problems.1202    Similarly, pipeline operations have pumps, valves, and1203sensors along the long linear pipeline, and that creates1204operations data that AI and machine learning might help us tp1205find a pinhole leak that those sensors otherwise can't develop.1206    And so support for R&D among the pipeline industry at1207places like the Pipeline Research Council International is1208happening right now by pipelines to try and benefit from AI.1209And a way Congress can help is to reauthorize the Pipeline1210Safety Technology Demonstration Program that Chairman Latta1211asked me about. That will help us test those technologies and1212show PHMSA how it should safely improve its regulations to1213benefit safety.1214    Mr. Guthrie. Thank you.1215    So Ms. Miller, do you also agree that this AI or1216technology--if you find leaks that are otherwise too small to1217be detected, how would that improve safety?1218    Ms. Miller. Thank you. Yes, I would echo what Mr. Black1219just highlighted. Our members are using AI today to be able to1220sort through large quantities of data to be able to identify1221trends and solve operational challenges. We believe that AI can1222inform risk assessment to help operators identify and repair--I1223am sorry, identify and manage first pipeline anomalies before1224they become leaks, and then also prioritize repairs in order to1225address those that pose the highest risk first.1226    Mr. Guthrie. Thanks.1227    Ms. Miller. We would encourage----1228    Mr. Guthrie. My time is expired, he is about to gavel me1229down. So I want to thank you for your answer.1230    And I will yield back.1231    Mr. Latta. Thank you very much. The gentleman yields back,1232and the Chair now recognizes the ranking member of the full1233committee, the gentleman from New Jersey, for 5 minutes for1234questions.1235    Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Chairman Latta. As I mentioned in1236my opening statement, I am concerned about a number of actions1237the Trump administration has taken at PHMSA in its first 61238months. And one of those was calling back a leak detection rule1239finalized in the last days of the Biden administration.1240    And I want to be clear: The rule was finalized and done,1241but the Trump administration instructed the Federal Register1242not to publish the rule and has since clawed it back. So I just1243want to point out that some of--to some of our newer Members1244that this rule was required by a bipartisan law that President1245Trump himself signed. That law required that PHMSA put forward1246a final rule within a year of enactment, and 4 years after the1247law was signed President Trump prevented the rule from being1248finalized.1249    So Mr. Caram, could you talk about the importance of the1250leak detection rule? Did it have buy-in from industry and1251public stakeholders? Did the Trump administration's decision1252make us safer?1253    Mr. Caram. Yes, thank you for the question.1254    That rule was negotiated, discussed over 2 weeks of1255advisory committee meetings with multiple stakeholder groups--1256industry, public, and government. There were a lot of unanimous1257votes. Not all of the votes were unanimous, but many of them1258were. And I would say consensus was reached on the vast1259majority of the issues in leak detection and repair.1260    And that rule was due, as you said, a year after. That1261would have been in December of 2021. So it is years overdue1262now. So it was really disappointing to see it pulled back from1263being published.1264    Mr. Pallone. And what about my question about did that1265decision by the Trump administration make us safer?1266    Mr. Caram. No, no, we continue to have incidents from known1267leaks. There are regulations on specifically what kind of1268equipment operators need to use, and the regulations around1269grading leaks as to how quickly they need to be repaired are1270vague. And it--that rule would have established those standards1271and, I believe, made pipelines safer.1272    Mr. Pallone. Well, thank you. Now I want to turn to a1273potential priority for a pipeline safety reauthorization bill.1274As you pointed out in your written testimony, PHMSA's safety1275rules are subject to a duplicative cost benefit analysis over1276and beyond the one already required for all other Federal1277rules. And this isn't a hypothetical problem. GPA Midstream,1278one of the witnesses represented here today, has used this at1279the DC Circuit Court to kill pipeline safety rules, and I--and1280to me that is unacceptable.1281    So Mr. Caram, would you talk about how this duplicative1282requirement harms public safety and whether Congress should1283look at removing this requirement in a reauthorization bill?1284    Mr. Caram. As far as I am aware, PHMSA is the only safety1285agency with this statutory cost benefit requirement that is1286duplicative over the Executive order. It is difficult to do1287cost benefit on low-frequency, high-consequence failures like1288you see with pipelines, and it hamstrings firms from making1289real progress on safety.1290    As you have mentioned, multiple rules over the last several1291years have been rolled back by the courts saying that PHMSA1292didn't fully justify the costs with benefits, and the benefits1293in many of these cases are human lives.1294    Mr. Pallone. Oh, thank you. I just want to, you know,1295mention to my Republican colleagues because we keep--they keep1296talking about a bipartisan bill. But if we are really going to1297have a bipartisan bill on this issue, it has to be solely--and1298I stress solely--about increasing safety.1299    You know, the committee Republicans' pipeline safety bill1300failed last Congress because it was not drafted, in my opinion,1301in a collaborative manner and included partisan provisions1302related to pipeline siting as opposed to safety. So that is--1303you know, it is not going to be bipartisan if it deals with1304siting and other issues other than safety.1305    So I just hope we can see a more collaborative process this1306year, Mr. Chairman. And with that I yield back the balance of1307my time.1308    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much. The gentleman yields1309back the balance of his time, and the Chair now recognizes the1310vice chair of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Texas, for 51311minutes for questions.1312    Mr. Weber. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1313    Mr. Black, I am going to come back to you. I want to1314highlight a section of your written testimony addressing1315pipeline safety: ``A 2018 report prepared by PHMSA analyzing 101316years of incident data found pipelines were 13 times safer than1317both trains and trucks, with pipelines experiencing 1 incident1318for every 720 million gallons, with rail incidents occurring1319every 50 million gallons delivered.'' Pipelines are the safest1320way to move this product. Agreed?1321    Mr. Black. Absolutely.1322    Mr. Weber. Yes, and then you also talked about an Obama1323administration analysis found rejecting a major pipeline and1324shipping the same crude oil by rail would increase the risk of1325oil release by over 800 times and barrels released by 2.61326times. Very, very important information.1327    The Keystone Pipeline would have come into my district, the1328Gulf Coast of Texas, over by Beaumont, Texas--Port Arthur, to1329be exact. We know that we can move product cleanly, and nobody1330wants--and I think in one of the other witness' testimony there1331was 18 or 30-something people killed in the last year, I think,1332if I recall that correctly, and that is so sad. Nobody wants1333that. Nobody is for that. I mean, everybody wants to do1334everything they can to prevent that. I mean, my gosh, we had a1335recent, you know, weather event in Texas where over 300 people1336lost their lives. It is always sad.1337    So I would say that we want--if you looked at the traffic1338records of last year--and this is--by the way, this is NHTSA's1339information. Last year in 2024, 39,000 people lost their lives1340in traffic. Everybody hates that. Nobody wants that. Everybody1341wants to do as safe as they can, and that goes with pipelines.1342Would you agree?1343    Mr. Black. Yes. Americans use liquid fuels every day. And1344if you cancel a pipeline, we are still going to use those1345fuels, they are going to move on to other modes that are less1346safe.1347    Mr. Weber. Right, and let me go back to the Keystone1348Pipeline. The Keystone Pipeline coming into my district would1349have carried 830,000 barrels of product a day.1350    Mr. Black. Yes.1351    Mr. Weber. If you do--if you divided that up into 18-1352wheelers, it is over 5,300 18-wheelers on the highway a day.1353What does that increase the chance of more and more people1354being killed on the highway? So nobody wants that. Obama shut1355down the Keystone Pipeline. Of course, President Trump got it1356back up and running and then Biden shut it down too.1357    So I am going to go back to your report. You said pipelines1358are down 30 percent over the last 5 years, and they remain the1359safest method to move product. We are always striving to1360improve that record. How can Congress ensure that PHMSA is1361equipped to modernize its regulations in step with industry1362innovation without imposing restrictions that could hinder1363progress? How do we do that?1364    Mr. Black. Well, several steps. One is to permanently1365reform the special permit program. As you know, there are so1366many different pipeline operating conditions and types of1367pipes. Sometimes PHMSA regulations are not one-size-fits-all1368for that pipe.1369    Second is to reauthorize without bureaucratic problems the1370Pipeline Safety Technology Demonstration program that we were1371talking.1372    And then to keep PHMSA focused on pipeline safety, and to1373fund--have everybody working on R&D to get us down to zero1374incidents.1375    Mr. Weber. It is safe to say, isn't it, in your opinion,1376that nobody who works in the pipeline industry--or in the1377fossil fuel industry, for that matter--wants to go home from1378their job and find out that one of their relatives was killed1379on the highway? Nobody wants that. It is the same with pipeline1380safety. Everybody who works in the industry doesn't want1381anybody to be killed in that endeavor.1382    Ms. Miller, I am going to come to you. My district along1383the Gulf Coast has three LNG export facilities--a fourth across1384the border in Louisiana--so we understand--the understanding is1385that PHMSA has been working to update regulations regarding the1386monitoring of LNG pipelines for corrosion, aligning them more1387closely with the risk-based industry standard--driven1388standards. Some estimates suggest these updates could save1389facilities millions of dollars annually.1390    With growing investment in LNG export capacity increasing1391global demand for U.S. energy, how can commonsense updates help1392safety regulations?1393    Very quickly. Turn your mic on.1394    Ms. Miller. Thank you for the question.1395    Yes, we do agree that performance-based or risk-based1396measures can help facilitate smarter safety regulation that1397actually achieves the outcomes that are desired. So we agree1398with you that performance-based measures facilitate safety.1399    Mr. Weber. And you would agree that nobody wants nobody1400they know, no Americans, nobody killed on the highways and1401nobody killed by pipelines. You would agree with that.1402    Ms. Miller. I totally agree with that.1403    Mr. Weber. Yes, I--1404    Ms. Miller. Safety is first.1405    Mr. Weber. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.1406    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back the balance1407of this time. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New1408Jersey's 8th District for 5 minutes for questions.1409    Mr. Menendez. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you for1410calling this hearing today, but I want to provide context for1411what is happening in Congress this week, what is happening1412outside the committee's doors.1413    The speaker has announced that we are going to have1414canceled votes this week. He is limiting the legislative action1415that can be taken on the floor. And I think most Americans1416would want to know why. Why would we limit the things that we1417can do to further the interests of our constituents? What would1418that issue be?1419    And the issue that has broken the Republican Party is their1420refusal to vote on the release of the Epstein files. Of all the1421things that we have to deal with as a country, the reason we1422can't do our work here is because Republicans refuse to deal1423with the Epstein files and the transparency that they promised1424the American people. The Republican Party is so broken that1425they refuse to hold this administration accountable or let us1426do our jobs to vote on legislation. But we are sitting here1427pretending that it is business as usual in this hearing room1428this morning, when we know that is not the case.1429    Let me also remind folks back home that just last month1430Republicans passed their highly partisan reconciliation1431package, which included provisions to bypass the Clean Water1432Act and erode States' rights to protect our constituents from1433polluting pipelines and a giveaway to fossil fuel companies. So1434at the same time that they are making it easier for fossil fuel1435companies to build pipelines in States and districts that don't1436want them, they are making it harder for Americans to access1437health care through Medicaid, through the ACA, by adding1438additional red tape.1439    So, easier for fossil fuel companies, harder for average1440Americans who are potentially dealing with long-term1441disabilities. The absolute lack of accountability is1442astounding.1443    Last year, the House Transportation and Infrastructure1444Committee put together and approved a truly bipartisan bill1445that would have reauthorized PHMSA pipeline safety programs for1446the next 4 years, giving families in all of our communities1447peace of mind that our pipelines are safe. Unfortunately, last1448year, instead of coming to the table, Energy and Commerce1449Republicans offered a bill that authorized significantly less1450than what we approved on T&I to the tune of $80 million less1451per year. In fact, the Republican Energy and Commerce bill1452would have cut activities that keep our communities safe by 181453percent from the 2020 authorization levels.1454    Mr. Caram, can you briefly touch on what a cut like this1455would mean for pipeline safety for all of our constituents?1456    Mr. Caram. Yes, thank you for that.1457    Inflation--since the last pipeline authorization, the PIPES1458Act of 2020, inflation has been over 20 percent. So an increase1459of anything less than 20 percent in this reauthorization would1460be a cut in funding. On top of that, there is new jurisdiction1461for PHMSA in gathering lines and the potential build-out of1462CO2 and hydrogen pipelines, all of which would1463require more funding. So a cut below the 2020 authorization1464would be quite drastic.1465    Mr. Menendez. That would make it more difficult for hiring1466and retaining the experts that we need to coordinate critical1467elements of our pipeline safety programs. Is that correct?1468    Mr. Caram. That is correct.1469    Mr. Menendez. And with the ongoing layoffs and buy-outs, we1470know that that is going to have an impact on pipeline safety1471programs. Is that correct?1472    Mr. Caram. I believe so. I am looking forward to hearing1473more about what is happening there.1474    Mr. Menendez. Yes, because we now have even less staff in1475an already understaffed agency that is responsible for keeping1476all of our families safe from the dangers of neglected1477pipelines. Republicans are proposing to cut an already1478underresourced agency, all while they are actively passing1479legislation and pushing for more pipelines. So less staff, less1480funding, and more work to do.1481    It is highly concerning to me that the Trump administration1482is turning a blind eye to bad behavior by fossil fuel companies1483while they are actively hamstringing the agency responsible for1484holding these companies accountable and keeping us all safe.1485And Republicans in Congress are enabling it by cutting1486resources for PHMSA and adding to their workload.1487    Would you say that the Republican approach to safety is1488making Americans less safe or more safe?1489    Mr. Caram. I would say cuts to PHMSA would make Americans1490less safe.1491    Mr. Menendez. Correct. And we know that the T&I has a bill1492that would actually make--a bipartisan bill that would provide1493the resources needed. But again, this committee, the1494Republicans on this committee, chose to go a different route1495and not act in a truly bipartisan way.1496    This is all problematic because Democrats on this committee1497want to deal with the challenges that we have in this country,1498want to do it in a thoughtful, bipartisan, bicameral way. We1499were able to do that on T&I, so it is not impossible. People1500think that we can't do these things in a bipartisan way. We1501absolutely can. T&I has shown us the way. This committee needs1502to follow T&I's lead to get those things done for the American1503people, to keep our constituents safe.1504    I hope that is the work that we can do in this Congress,1505but apparently we won't be able to do it because Republicans1506refuse to release the Epstein files.1507    I yield back.1508    Mr. Latta. The gentleman yields back the balance of his1509time, and the Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio's151012th District for 5 minutes for questions.1511    Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for1512being here today. My first question is for Ms. Miller.1513    Thank you for being here. In your testimony you state that1514in-plant piping regulation by PHMSA is duplicative to the1515safety programs under the jurisdiction of OSHA. Can you1516elaborate on the requirements in-plant pipes must comply with1517under OSHA's process safety management standards?1518    Ms. Miller. Thank you for the question.1519    I appreciate--we do appreciate this committee's1520consideration of the opportunity to bring legislative certainty1521to eliminating the duplication. So OSHA's pipeline safety1522management system does have requirements that include, for1523example, making sure that we have written operation--written1524operating procedures for covered processes, for maintaining1525integrity, for managing change.1526    We would note that PHMSA itself has acknowledged that the1527OSHA safety management imposed on gas in-plant piping is of a1528similar quality to what PHMSA itself would be requiring, and1529the duplication of that effort brings--it is cumbersome, it1530brings not only duplicated demand for resources, but there can1531be inconsistencies.1532    I would highlight, for example, one of the things is that1533we have inspectors from each of the agencies who are reviewing1534our operations. And when they do so, they come with different1535experience, different subject matter expertise. So the OSHA1536inspectors have familiarity with inspecting in-plants, for1537example, in refineries. The PHMSA inspectors have more1538experience inspecting interstate transmission lines, for1539example, and so that the opportunity to have--engage with a1540regulator who has more experience with in-plant piping brings1541more consistency and efficient use of resources that can be1542applied to other safety matters.1543    Mr. Balderson. Thank you. Can you discuss the challenges1544your members have in ensuring safe operations when two1545different Federal regulators are overseeing the same piping?1546    Ms. Miller. Thank you. I would repeat, then, that it is the1547complication of having two potentially inconsistent sets of1548requirements, standing up two programs to be able to achieve1549similar safety-desired outcomes but through different means1550with different types of inspections, different requirements,1551which is just a drain on resources and can be inconsistent or1552contradictory.1553    Mr. Balderson. Would you say this conflict and regulatory1554overlap like in the case of in-plant pipes make it more1555confusing and challenging to maintain safe operations for GPA1556Midstream members?1557    Ms. Miller. I would.1558    Mr. Balderson. You also wrote in your testimony that PHMSA1559is rightfully taking action with the recent notice of proposed1560rulemaking----1561    Tough position here, I can't see.1562    Proposed rulemaking to alleviate this regulatory1563uncertainty regarding in-plant gas piping. Would you agree1564that, while the agency's proposal is welcome and necessary,1565Congress can and should still act to remedy this issue with a1566statutory fix to provide certainty for industry now and into1567the future?1568    Ms. Miller. Absolutely, yes. The notice of proposed1569rulemaking from PHMSA is a great start, but we would appreciate1570Congress making that permanent. Our members appreciate1571legislative predictability and certainty so they can plan for1572long-term operations.1573    Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Ms. Miller.1574    Mr. Black--and I want to be--I have a minute and 23--follow1575up with you. Last Congress this committee passed a strong1576pipeline safety reauthorization that strengthened penalties on1577individuals that damage, destroy, or impair the operation of1578pipeline facilities. I have heard from a number of pipeline1579workers and operators in my district who have strong concerns1580about worker safety due to an increase in attacks and vandalism1581on pipelines over the last several years.1582    Mr. Black, can you discuss why it is so important for1583Congress to choose loopholes and strengthen penalties on1584individuals that attack pipelines?1585    And a followup: Would doing so help protect the safety and1586security of your members, employees, and pipeline workers?1587    Mr. Black. Actions that tamper with the pipeline risk1588hurting of the people who live nearby, the perpetrators1589themselves, and the environment. We have seen people cutting1590through chains to turn valves, shooting pipeline components1591before they are installed, and shooting a high--you know, using1592a blowtorch on pipelines.1593    There is--Congress said no--criminal penalties in pipeline1594safety law for damaging and destroying, but there is a1595loophole. If you tamper with a pipeline but you don't1596immediately damage or destroy it, it is not covered by the1597Federal pipeline safety laws. If you cover that, if you take1598that action to close that loophole, you will protect the1599environment and the workforce around those, and we would1600encourage you to do that in your reauthorization.1601    Mr. Balderson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, I yield1602back.1603    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back, and the1604Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Virginia's 4th1605District for 5 minutes for questions.1606    Ms. McClellan. Thank you, Chairman Latta and Ranking Member1607Castor, for holding this very important hearing.1608    In recent years we have seen several pipeline incidents in1609Virginia that underscore the importance of the pipeline safety1610program. Communities across the Commonwealth have long raised1611concerns about the Mountain Valley Pipeline, from construction1612activities contaminating drinking water to the risk of corroded1613pipes failing. These fears were sustained when in 2024 a1614section of the pipeline failed during hydro testing, a process1615that uses pressurized water to check pipe integrity.1616    And in the summer of 2023 a TC Energy natural gas pipeline1617in the Shenandoah Valley exploded, likely due to cracking in1618the pipe.1619    In each of these cases, PHMSA has had critical1620responsibilities conducting testing during construction,1621investigating pipeline failures, and imposing corrective1622action. As this committee takes on reauthorization of the1623pipeline safety program, we must ensure that PHMSA has the1624personnel and resources it needs to carry out its vital1625responsibilities and keep our communities safe. So I am glad1626that Ranking Member Castor asked questions on that point.1627    The Mountain Valley Pipeline cuts through the Jefferson1628National Forest and crosses hundreds of waterways and wetlands.1629And since the start of the project, there have been around16301,500 reported pollution incidents impacting rivers, streams,1631and drinking water supply. During construction and testing of1632the Mountain Valley Pipeline, we heard that farmers and1633landowners were seeking more communication and engagement from1634PHMSA around the risks to their land and water resources, which1635I think is just as important a safety concern that we should1636all be worried about.1637    So Mr. Caram, I appreciate the Pipeline Safety Trust's work1638to make pipeline safety information more readily available and1639accessible to the public. And in addition to addressing the1640reckless workforce cuts that we have seen, how would you1641recommend that PHMSA improve its efforts to prevent pollution1642incidents and better engage community members?1643    Mr. Caram. Thank you for the question.1644    I think it comes back to strong regulations and effective1645enforcement in pipeline safety management systems in order to1646limit these incidents. And really, all three need to work1647together. There's lots of room for improvement on all three,1648and I hope the committee is looking to take that on.1649    As far as community engagement, you know, the Pipeline1650Safety Trust has really believed that an Office of Public1651Engagement at PHMSA would be a big improvement. Public1652engagement hasn't been a strength of the agency historically,1653but they have made improvements in recent years. But I hate to1654see how going from 13 employees down to 3 is going to backpedal1655that progress that they have made.1656    Ms. McClellan. I agree with that.1657    Community members and environmental groups have long raised1658concerns about potential corrosion issues in the Mountain1659Valley Pipeline in particular, which has been laying in fields,1660exposed to the elements for years before all permit approvals1661were forced through in the 2023 debt ceiling bill.1662    Corrosion is also a growing issue for pipelines in coastal1663areas, where rising sea levels and saltwater intrusion,1664exacerbated by climate change, are speeding up pipe1665degradation.1666    So, Mr. Caram, as we look at reauthorizing this pipeline1667safety program, what additional authorities or resources does1668PHMSA need to better address corrosion control to ensure1669pipeline safety?1670    Mr. Caram. So there's two main defenses against corrosion.1671One is coding. That is really the first line of defense. And1672when coding fails, the second line of defense is cathodic1673protection. PHMSA has made some improvements to the cathodic1674protection on natural gas transmission pipelines recently, and1675we look forward to seeing how those are impacted--how those1676impact failures and effects of corrosion.1677    But there aren't specific regulations on the condition of1678coding. They are pretty vague, and they leave a lot up to the1679operator's judgment. The consent order we saw with Mountain1680Valley Pipeline put some prescriptions on what coding--tests1681coding needs to pass and things like that, and those would make1682a great addition to the regulations for all pipelines.1683    Ms. McClellan. Thank you. And I don't have time for you to1684answer my last question, but for the record--because we also1685need to worry about cybersecurity--and I would be curious to--1686Mr. Caram, to know if you think that PHMSA and DHS--CISA in1687particular--are still well equipped to monitor and combat1688growing cyber threats to pipelines. And if you could submit1689that for the record, I would appreciate it.1690    Mr. Caram. Thank you.1691    Ms. McClellan. Thank you.1692    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady's time has expired,1693and the Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Alabama's 6th1694District for 5 minutes for questions.1695    Mr. Palmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.1696    And I will allow you to answer that question from Ms.1697McClellan. That is in line with some of my questions.1698    Mr. Caram. Well, I will say that cybersecurity is not1699really in the wheelhouse of pipeline safety for our1700organization. It is more of a reliability issue. So we don't1701really dig into the weeds on it.1702    The way we have approached it is the integrity management1703program for high-consequence areas requires an operator to1704identify all potential threats against the pipeline, create a1705plan to mitigate against those threats, and implement that1706plan. And cybersecurity threats should be considered one of1707those threats, and PHMSA could adopt some specific standards1708within integrity management.1709    To the rest of your question, as far as agency1710coordination, is beyond my expertise.1711    Mr. Palmer. Mr. Black, I would like for you to take a shot1712at that question, as well.1713    But back in 2021 we had a ransomware attack on the Colonial1714Pipeline, which was in my district, and there have been1715multiple attacks at various healthcare facilities around the1716country. And as more pipeline networks enter--become part of1717that equation, the threat of another attack is very much a real1718possibility, whether it is a fuel line like the Colonial1719Pipeline or other pipelines. Can you address what--where you1720think we are in terms of protecting our pipelines from cyber1721attacks and what we need to do to protect them?1722    Mr. Black. I am glad to address both. Cybersecurity is very1723important to pipelines.1724    Like any Fortune 500 company, pipeline operators need to1725maintain safeguards to protect their commercial systems and1726their operational systems. They will do that in concert with1727the Transportation Security Administration, working with them1728on cyber directives.1729    I believe you asked about CISA reauthorization. LEPA1730supports reauthorization of CISA. That will give pipeline1731operators the opportunity, a safe place to work with1732governments to talk about threats. It is quite important that1733PHMSA coordinate with those--with cybersecurity expertise to1734make sure that anything that PHMSA does is in concert with what1735they know about how to do cybersecurity for pipelines, which--1736quickly evolving technologies and threats. Very important.1737    Mr. Palmer. So are you hearing much on that from industry?1738    Mr. Black. Every day we know there are attempts to breach--1739of breaches. I participate in classified briefings from1740government. We must always have our guard on pipeline safety.1741Thankfully, there are recommended practices. There are1742interactions with government and experts to try and improve1743that. We can never be--stop our vigilance.1744    Mr. Palmer. Do you feel like PHMSA is weighing in on this1745properly, they are doing their part? Or is there--do we need to1746be doing more?1747    Mr. Black. PHMSA is not key on cybersecurity, and I think1748that is OK. We will work with CISA and with TSA. We need PHMSA1749to make sure they are talking with them. Many of these1750briefings, PHMSA is a part of those. That coordination should1751be done right to make sure there is not conflicts and1752overlapping and pipeline operators being told to do two1753different things. We need to make sure we are doing that right.1754    Mr. Palmer. Do we know if these are just--in the ransomware1755attack situation with Colonial Pipeline, that was just some1756people trying to extort money. But do we have a nation state1757involved in this, or people who are being given safe harbors?1758We know they are in China and Russia and other places to launch1759these attacks. Is there any----1760    Mr. Black. Generally, yes. And I know there is people I can1761encourage you to talk to in government that can help you more.1762But we must be vigilant and must be working on this well1763every----1764    Mr. Palmer. Yes, my concern about this transcends the1765pipelines. I mean, it is the critical infrastructure across the1766country that could be subject to a cyber attack, whether it is1767a ransomware attack or, you know, from a state-sponsored1768terrorist group.1769    I mean, it could be anything, and I think that our grid, in1770its totality, not just the power grid but the entire totality1771of the grid, whether it is pipelines or power, we have got to1772make this a very serious issue, not--a top priority----1773    Mr. Black. We Americans----1774    Mr. Palmer [continuing]. For protecting----1775    Mr. Black [continuing]. Use all these forms of energy every1776day, and we can't afford to have something down from a cyber1777incident. You are absolutely right. Thank you for paying1778attention to that.1779    Mr. Palmer. Well, I appreciate your response.1780    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.1781    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back the balance1782of his time, and the Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from1783Colorado's 1st District for 5 minutes for questions.1784    Ms. DeGette. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to1785all the witnesses.1786    Mr. Black, I am peering around here to you. You just said1787we should always have the eye on pipeline safety, and you were1788talking about cyber. But I am assuming you mean in every1789respect pipeline safety is really critical for this country. Is1790that correct?1791    Mr. Black. I am making sure you are looking at me,1792Congresswoman.1793    Ms. DeGette. Thank you.1794    Mr. Black. Yes, of course. Pipeline safety is our goal.1795    Ms. DeGette. And Ms. Miller, I assume you would agree with1796that too.1797    Mr. Caram?1798    Ms. Miller. I would agree, as well.1799    Ms. DeGette. Mr. Caram?1800    Mr. Caram. Yes, I agree.1801    Ms. DeGette. And Mr. Moriarty?1802    Mr. Moriarty. Yes, I do.1803    Ms. DeGette. Yes, it is sort of a fundamental. As we are1804transporting more material through pipelines and many of them1805aging because of the administration's emphasis on oil and gas1806development, we need to make sure that our pipelines are safe.1807We need to figure out a way, preferably in a bipartisan way, to1808do that statutorily. And that is what we are talking about here1809today.1810    But I was recently reading an article in The Wall Street1811Journal, and it talked about how the number of violation1812reviews has dropped by 95 percent in the first 4 months of this1813President Trump's second term, compared to the same period1814under President Biden, and at number--and a 93 percent drop1815compared to Donald Trump's first term.1816    And at the same time, the President has said that he1817doesn't want enforcement in a lot of these areas. And so I am--1818and so--and also, of course, then there is DOGE unceremoniously1819just having these layoffs across government, which we don't1820really know how many of those people were laid off, I don't1821think, at PHMSA. But given the dramatic drop of open reviews of1822safety violations, I am not sure that that means that there1823aren't violations. It just, I think, means that there aren't1824reviews.1825    So Mr. Caram, I want to ask you, isn't it true that1826significant pipeline incidents have not decreased over the past182720 years?1828    Mr. Caram. That is true.1829    Ms. DeGette. So let's talk about the Keystone Pipeline leak1830in Kansas, which was just 3 years ago, the largest offshore oil1831spill in almost a decade, and the third major spill in 5 years.1832That was quite serious, is that right?1833    Mr. Caram. Yes, that was a lot of oil.1834    Ms. DeGette. A lot of oil. And then last year a pipeline in1835Louisiana leaked for almost 2 hours because there were no1836pipeline operators on site, and the monitoring equipment1837malfunctioned. So that meant many residents weren't even1838notified of the leak. That was also pretty serious, wasn't it?1839    Mr. Caram. Yes.1840    Ms. DeGette. And are there other examples of leaks that we1841are seeing that are just happening right now?1842    Mr. Caram. Yes, you can look at the NTSB open investigation1843docket and see lots of examples of what the NTSB is1844investigating. Also their recently closed. There was a million-1845gallon spill off the coast of Louisiana that they just1846completed their investigation of, and unfortunately there is1847many, many stories.1848    Ms. DeGette. So reducing the number--so the fact there is1849fewer safety violations, that doesn't mean necessarily there is1850that many--95 percent fewer leaks.1851    Mr. Caram. Correct.1852    Ms. DeGette. So before the Trump administration took over,1853PHMSA was already deemed to be understaffed and underfunded. Is1854that right?1855    Mr. Caram. Yes.1856    Ms. DeGette. And then, since President Trump took office,1857more than half of the senior executive roles at PHMSA are empty1858due to a hiring freeze and buy-out offers from DOGE. Is that1859right?1860    Mr. Caram. As far as I know, it is.1861    Ms. DeGette. OK. And now the Trump administration's recent1862budget request would keep PHMSA's funding completely flat, and1863is $16 million less than the Biden administration's last1864proposed budget. Is that your understanding?1865    Mr. Caram. I have not looked at the President's budget.1866    Ms. DeGette. OK. Now, so if we have flat or reduced1867staffing, what risk is that going to pose to public safety, do1868you think?1869    Mr. Caram. Well, I believe that PHMSA was already an1870underresourced, understaffed agency, given the huge charge that1871they have on pipeline safety and the 3 million miles of1872pipeline. We wanted to see significant increases to that1873funding. And seeing flat or reduced funding, I can't imagine1874how that won't----1875    Ms. DeGette. So will that----1876    Mr. Caram [continuing]. Impact safety.1877    Ms. DeGette [continuing]. Help with inspections, safety1878inspections?1879    Mr. Caram. We would like to see that, an--1880    Ms. DeGette. No, no, I mean----1881    Mr. Caram [continuing]. Increase in funding.1882    Ms. DeGette [continuing]. Would the decreased funding help1883with increasing safety inspections?1884    Mr. Caram. No. My understanding is the reductions in force,1885the inspectors were protected from those reductions in force,1886and they were not allowed to participate in that program, but1887we haven't seen any numbers on that.1888    But I will say that, beyond just inspectors, the entire1889agency is dedicated to safety, and they support inspectors.1890They support regulations and enforcement. And so any1891reduction----1892    Mr. Latta. The gentlelady's time has expired.1893    Ms. DeGette. Thank you.1894    Mr. Latta. Thank you very much. The Chair now recognizes1895the gentleman from Texas's 11th District, 5 minutes for1896questions.1897    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have some1898questions that I will get to, but does anybody have any1899thoughts on this last discussion we just heard, that safety1900incidents are out of control, or want to push back on anything?1901    Mr. Black?1902    Mr. Black. Sure, I will cover enforcement. I divide this1903year into two chapters. Before PHMSA introduced Office of Chief1904Counsel memos adopting mandates from Congress in the 2020 Act--1905since then I understand enforcement numbers are more similar.1906Before then, even when numbers were lower, the quality was high1907in terms of responding to the major incidents. On two lines1908they issued corrective action orders, and the industry supports1909PHMSA being an effective regulator.1910    Mr. Pfluger. Yes, OK.1911    Ms. Miller. I would just echo that our members do encourage1912that we have a strong and well-informed, well-resourced1913regulator for the--but not only the safety, but also make sure1914that we have predictable expectations for our operations.1915    Mr. Pfluger. Yes, but reasonable----1916    Ms. Miller. Correct.1917    Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. Being the key word, yes, thank1918you. OK. And Ms. Miller, I will stick with you and I will start1919with the gas gathering rule. And as you are aware, this1920significantly expanded PHMSA's jurisdiction, bringing more than1921400,000 additional miles of gathering lines under Federal1922oversight. And they are located in districts like mine in the1923Permian Basin, where there is a heavy presence of production1924there, and very important.1925    And the scope of implementation of this rule could have1926major implications for how the gathering systems are built and1927operated going forward, so we want to get this right. We want1928to be reasonable, and safety is important. It is a major1929concern, and there are other concerns, as well.1930    But from your perspective, what implementation challenges1931are operators currently facing on the ground?1932    And how can PHMSA better distinguish between high-risk and1933then lower-risk areas? Again, reasonable in the way1934governments--which is not always the way it is done, but----1935    Ms. Miller. No, I appreciate that question very much.1936    Yes, we do very much value the opportunity to have risk-1937based assessment of safety concerns. There--just because, for1938example, a pipeline may have--two different pipelines may have1939a similar diameter or similar pressure, there are other1940circumstances to consider in order to make sure that we are1941assessing what the risk is appropriately, including, for1942example, proximity to populations, length of pipeline.1943    One of the things I also wanted to make sure that this1944subcommittee is familiar with is the difference between--the1945differences that exist between gathering pipelines and1946transmission pipelines, not only physically but commercially.1947So it is important to remember that the interstate pipelines1948are subject to regulated rates with uniform tariffs versus1949gathering pipelines are subject to market-based, negotiated1950compensation and negotiated commercial terms. So very different1951application.1952    Mr. Pfluger. I am sorry that more of my colleagues aren't1953here to hear that. And we always take trips down there, and we1954do point out the difference in the Permian Basin of gathering1955systems versus the larger pipelines, interstate type.1956    And just real quickly--and I want to get to Mr. Moriarty--1957but having frequent GPAC meetings and ensuring participation1958from stakeholders, what is the importance of that and how does1959that help PHMSA regulate?1960    Ms. Miller. We really appreciate the GPAC process. We think1961it helps bring more informed regulation, which therefore is1962more likely to be implementable. And we want to encourage that1963that GPAC process also include more insights from gathering1964operators when it is regulating as it is more--as PHMSA is more1965often regulating gathering now.1966    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you.1967    Just I had--Mr. Moriarty, I had some things I was going to1968say, but let me just get right to the question. In your view,1969is there any realistic path to a reliable grid without natural1970gas playing a role as the backbone--the backbone?1971    Mr. Moriarty. Thank you, Congressman. No, there is not.1972    Mr. Pfluger. And would you agree that, if we are going to1973meet the rising demand while also keeping the lights on, that1974we need to get serious about modernizing and expanding our1975natural gas infrastructure? And give us your thoughts on that.1976    Mr. Moriarty. Yes, I would agree with that. Natural gas1977pipelines are the safest way to move the energy that this1978Nation needs. And there is ever more demand for energy across1979our service territories, which is the United States. And to1980meet those demands, we need to construct and safely operate1981pipelines, as well as LNG storage facilities.1982    Mr. Pfluger. Where did the negativity come from in this1983country towards pipelines? Like, I mean, what--how did we get1984here?1985    Mr. Moriarty. Well, I don't know. At Chesapeake Utilities--1986and that is what I can speak of--we take very seriously our1987obligations to the communities we serve. And those communities1988are where we live and where we work.1989    Mr. Pfluger. Yes.1990    Mr. Moriarty. So if an issue is raised with us, we1991immediately study it and address it. So I am not quite sure1992what is happening elsewhere.1993    Mr. Pfluger. Yes. Science and math. They are the safest1994form of transportation and transmission. And they keep the1995lights on.1996    I yield back.1997    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired, and1998he yields back. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from1999Massachusetts's 4th District for 5 minutes for questions.2000    Mr. Auchincloss. Thank you, Chairman. I appreciate the2001witnesses being here today.2002    I do want to start off by echoing the comments from my2003colleague from New Jersey, Mr. Menendez. Like him, I sat on the2004Transportation and Infrastructure Committee last Congress. The2005difference in process on pipeline safety reauthorization2006between what I saw there and what has been described about this2007committee's process last year could not be more different.2008    On T&I it was a bipartisan bill. Not everyone got2009everything they wanted, but everyone got something, and we were2010able to move the ball on safety. And it just seems like that is2011the opposite of what happened here last year. I really hope2012this time is different, because there is a lot of areas where2013we can move the ball forward in a bipartisan way.2014    Mr. Caram, did the Pipeline Safety Trust think that there2015were serious issues with the partisan bill that E&C Republicans2016put forward last year?2017    Mr. Caram. There were--as mentioned earlier, there were2018several provisions in the bill that had nothing to do with2019pipeline safety, like permitting reform, gas stove protections,2020and CCS well permitting that really don't have anything to do2021with pipeline safety.2022    Mr. Auchincloss. Mr. Black, you had said earlier that your2023constituency wants--industry wants predictable regulation. Is2024that right?2025    Mr. Black. Yes, sir.2026    Mr. Auchincloss. Do you think that when items that are2027unrelated to the core issue of pipeline safety and that have a2028strongly polarized and partisan bent to them are added to2029pipeline safety bills, does that make the overall product more2030or less predictable?2031    Mr. Black. Well, we support Congress reauthorizing the2032pipeline safety laws. We supported the T&I bill and the Energy2033and Commerce bill. In the end, we want good policies enacted.2034It is up to you all to--how to do it.2035    Mr. Auchincloss. Right. But if the policies enacted are2036done on a partisan basis, does that inspire more or less2037confidence in the industry that they can count on those2038regulations over a generational time span? Because you are2039making long-term capital investments, right? So having the2040goalpost move on you, not helpful.2041    Mr. Black. I mean, I understand your question. We wanted2042Congress to act on reauthorization last time. We had2043priorities. We haven't achieved them. We would like you to do2044it now, whatever that takes.2045    Mr. Auchincloss. And Mr. Caram, I assume you didn't think2046it was perfect, but did the Pipeline Safety Trust think that2047the bipartisan T&I bill was closer to the mark than the2048partisan E&C bill?2049    Mr. Caram. Yes. There were some good provisions in there.2050We didn't think it went far enough to make a real meaningful2051difference on pipeline safety, but there were really good2052provisions that we supported and support.2053    Mr. Auchincloss. And did you want to weigh in on that, Mr.2054Black?2055    Mr. Black. We supported both bills.2056    Mr. Auchincloss. You supported both bills, but they were2057very different bills. So was there elements of T&I or E&C that2058you thought were particularly productive?2059    Mr. Black. I am trying to remember. There were things that2060were in Energy and Commerce that weren't in T&I, and we were2061hoping that that would get reconciled if there was one big bill2062going to the floor.2063    We--you know, bipartisan action is necessary to make a law.2064How you start, again, is up to you all. Our goal is smart2065public policies that are improving safety.2066    Mr. Auchincloss. Bipartisan action is necessary to make a2067law.2068    Mr. Black. Sure.2069    Mr. Auchincloss. Agreed. I want to be positive today, talk2070about some of the important things to include in the pipeline2071safety package, rather than just the process that I didn't2072think was productive.2073    One point that has come across in multiple testimonies is2074that some States could stand to improve their programs to2075prevent third-party excavation damages. Mr. Caram, could you2076talk a little bit about what changes States can make to those2077programs and how PHMSA and Congress could play a role?2078    Mr. Caram. Sure. I think that is an area where all four2079witnesses agree on the improvements to be made. The Common2080Ground Alliance has a set of best practices for State programs,2081and some States implement all of those best practices and2082others don't. And having those as the baseline for all States,2083I think, would make a big improvement on damage prevention.2084    Things like exemptions to 811----2085    Mr. Auchincloss. Yes.2086    Mr. Caram [continuing]. Certain States allow certain2087municipalities not to have to call 811, for example, and not2088allowing that would be great.2089    Mr. Auchincloss. Does anybody want to weigh in on that?2090    Mr. Black. All these industries are going to support2091improved damage prevention. There are provisions, I believe,2092that were in the T&I bill last time--I can't remember about2093Energy and Commerce--to move forward damage prevention, and we2094would support those.2095    Mr. Auchincloss. Yes, the T&I bill had some good stuff in2096there.2097    I yield back.2098    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back, and the2099Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Tennessee's 1st2100District for 5 minutes for questions.2101    Mrs. Harshbarger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to2102the witnesses for being here today.2103    Can you see me for that big chair?2104    Ms. Miller, as Ranking Member Pallone stated, GPA2105successfully argued that some PHMSA regulations have not been2106cost effective. But how important is cost-effective regulation2107for operators as you prioritize safety?2108    Ms. Miller. We believe cost benefit analysis that is part2109of the PHMSA regulation rulemaking process is very important.2110We want to make sure that we are able to prioritize the2111highest-value safety priorities and also make sure that2112regulation is implementable, that there is technology actually2113available in order to achieve those goals.2114    The process now for the implementation of rules which2115provides for input from the GPAC process but also from the2116public ensures that there is a more informed regulation that is2117more likely to be executed.2118    Mrs. Harshbarger. Was the leak detection and repair rule2119finalized by the previous administration workable for2120operators?2121    And did it align with the congressional intent of the PIPES2122Act of 2020?2123    Ms. Miller. We do not believe that it did. We do support2124leak detection and repair technologies being implemented in2125accordance with Congress' mandate.2126    Mrs. Harshbarger. OK. All right. You know, there is an2127increasing threat to pipeline safety, as we all know, from bad2128actors that wish to cause harm to pipelines and surrounding2129communities. In 2022 there was a movie entitled, ``How to Blow2130Up a Pipeline,'' and it was portrayed by a group of teenagers2131trying to blow up an oil pipeline to protest climate change.2132    Mr. Black, what measures have operators taken to prevent2133bad actors disrupting pipelines and jeopardizing public safety?2134    Mr. Black. It was so sad to see a movie that was glorifying2135attacks on pipelines. I remember at the time us encouraging2136Federal actors to put out bulletins to be looking for copycat2137activities on that. Thankfully, I am not aware of anything that2138happened because of that movie.2139    Congress can help by closing loopholes and make it clear2140that, if you just turn a valve or damage a pipeline component--2141you think you are not hurting anything--you could be leading to2142a pressure buildup or a rupture later that hurts yourself,2143people, and the environment.2144    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes, absolutely.2145    Ms. Miller, how can Congress ensure that pipeline2146permitting timelines are predictable and not subject to2147unnecessary delays in litigation?2148    Ms. Miller. Well, we would appreciate Congress' attention2149to that. We do think that the permitting for pipelines which2150are essential to be--to deliver natural gas to the communities2151that need it is very important. And there is an opportunity to2152make sure that that is a balanced process that reflects not2153only the need to have access to energy but also safety and2154environmental protections. And we believe that is possible.2155    We also believe that that is very important, an important2156priority for our operators across the industry.2157    Mrs. Harshbarger. OK. Mr. Moriarty, as the U.S. expands2158hydrogen pipeline networks, what unique safety and regulatory2159challenges do these fuels represent?2160    And how should PHMSA's mandate evolve to address them?2161    Mr. Moriarty. Thank you very much for the question. It is a2162very good question.2163    We have been blending hydrogen with natural gas at a2164facility that we have in Florida. And we have blended up to 52165percent, and it was not only inexpensive but also very good for2166the generation that was happening there. So we are we are2167bullish on the role of hydrogen.2168    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.2169    Mr. Moriarty. What we are still studying, and I think the2170industry is studying, is how much blending can occur without2171challenging the integrity of those pipelines.2172    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.2173    Mr. Moriarty. Our interstate pipeline infrastructure is the2174envy of the world. I mean, we are able to deliver energy and so2175many others, you know, to the people here in the country as2176well as to the industry. So we see further study on that as2177helpful as you consider PHMSA's reauthorization.2178    Mrs. Harshbarger. OK. Thank you, sir. And with that, Mr.2179Chairman, I yield back.2180    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back, and the2181Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from North Dakota for 52182minutes for questions.2183    Mrs. Fedorchak. Excellent. Thank you. I wasn't expecting to2184be up so soon. I am usually the very last, so I guess it pays2185to stick around.2186    Well, thank you all for being here. I appreciate you2187lending your expertise to this very, very important subject. I2188have been a pipeline proponent for many years. I spent 12 years2189as a utility regulator and permitted a lot of pipelines myself2190in the State of North Dakota, so I want to talk a little bit2191about the State role first.2192    I recognize that--I have recognized the challenges at PHMSA2193in terms of staffing for years. One of the challenges is they2194don't operate a State inspection training program as2195effectively as they could to help get more State inspectors out2196there. It takes too long to certify these people.2197    So what do you think they could be doing to help?2198    And what are you guys focusing on in terms of encouraging2199PHMSA to use, like, remote training programs and really get the2200training system up to speed so that the State inspectors can2201hit the ground running sooner?2202    Mr. Black, maybe you and Mr. Caram----2203    Mr. Black. It is great to have you on the committee, given2204your role in North Dakota. Thank you, and welcome.2205    State inspectors with quality experience and knowledge on2206pipeline inspections is very important. I have been to PHMSA's2207Training Center in Oklahoma City. And you're right, it is2208important to be able to expand the capacity of that training.2209It is in the industry's interest that anybody inspecting a2210pipeline is quality, knows what they are doing, and is working2211in concert with others. We would like to do that.2212    We would like to also see States reduce damage prevention2213exemptions so that we can protect pipeline safety, and then to2214work in their inspections with PHMSA to make sure that they are2215not duplicative when PHMSA has approved a State to inspect2216interstate transmission.2217    Mrs. Fedorchak. OK. I would encourage you to encourage2218PHMSA to do online training for State inspectors, at least for2219some of the programs. They don't have to be present.2220    Mr. Black. I will make that call today.2221    Mrs. Fedorchak. If they could do that----2222    Mr. Black. Thank you.2223    Mrs. Fedorchak. Yes. Mr. Caram, any----2224    Mr. Caram. Yes, I will echo Mr. Black's comment. I welcome2225your expertise and experience to the subcommittee, and I think2226the quality of your question really shows the--that expertise2227that you bring. And so thank you for it.2228    It is a--you have identified a real issue with State2229programs. I think, in addition to how long training takes, I2230think, you know, increasing firms' ability to attract and2231retain talent--I know there is a lot of competition for these2232inspectors once they are trained to be, you know, paid more by2233the industry. And so giving PHMSA more--well, giving the State2234programs more flexibility under the PHMSA program in their2235ability to attract and retain through the funding and their2236agreements, I think, would go a long way in keeping that talent2237on the State programs longer.2238    Mrs. Fedorchak. OK, very good. Thank you. I would also2239encourage you to make those comments to PHMSA.2240    Mr. Caram. I will do so.2241    Mrs. Fedorchak. The--I am curious about this demonstration2242program that was kind of choked off by the last administration.2243    Mr. Black, I mean, everybody here has talked about the use2244of technology, and that is something that we can--should be2245able to agree on on a bipartisan manner. Let's use the2246technology for a better purpose.2247    What do we need to do to reinvigorate this pilot program so2248we can test some of this stuff and get it in the field?2249    Mr. Black. First, Congresswoman, reauthorize the program in2250this upcoming reauthorization. It lapsed. Nobody uses it. It2251was because PHMSA applied rules that you all didn't tell them2252to do. So tell them to do it without bureaucratic hurdles. I2253don't think they will apply the special permit process to it--2254or NEPA to these decisions, but show PHMSA the importance that2255you have in demonstrating new technologies and how they can2256improve pipeline safety.2257    Mrs. Fedorchak. OK, very good. And then my last question2258will have to be quick.2259    Our infrastructure is aging, but it is really, really hard2260for companies to build new pipelines. I mean, so this one goes2261to you, Mr. Caram. You have got kind of a bully pulpit to talk2262about these issues in terms of a public safety position, and2263talk about the value of pipelines in terms of being the safest2264method to transport a lot of these products.2265    What are you doing to help educate the public about the2266need for replacing old, aging pipelines that are more prone to2267leaks with the new stuff to--and to help advocate for2268permitting processes that are certain and the construction of a2269new pipeline after that?2270    Mr. Caram. Well, we don't necessarily see the, you know,2271permitting reform as part of our mission on pipeline safety.2272But we do advocate for, you know, the pipe replacement program2273that was in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act and has been some2274draft legislation on this round of reauthorization. And we2275continue to support that program to replace that aging, leak-2276prone, problematic pipe.2277    Mrs. Fedorchak. OK. I am over time, sorry. Thank you all, I2278appreciate----2279    Mr. Latta. The gentlelady's time----2280    Mrs. Fedorchak. I yield back.2281    Mr. Latta [continuing]. Has expired, and yields back, and2282the Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas's 33rd2283District for 5 minutes for questions.2284    Mr. Veasey. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and let me2285start by reaffirming, I think, what we all know to be true, and2286that pipeline safety is not a luxury, but it is a necessity.2287And we rely on over literally 3 million miles of pipeline to2288move energy and materials that power this country. It is very2289critical for keeping our houses cool and keeping them warm, and2290jobs.2291    So I mean, it is important for everything, and that is why2292PHMSA's mission is so important and it is why this committee's2293work to reauthorize PHMSA is long overdue. I think that we have2294let the agency's authorities lapse, even as pipeline miles2295expand and aging infrastructure strains and new fuels like2296hydrogen and CO2 are finally starting to enter the2297system.2298    And as a Texan, I know better than most how central2299pipelines are to American energy. They are efficient, they are2300economical, and they are essential. But they are also not2301infallible, and we have to look for ways that we can raise the2302bar on safety. With new energy demand surging, the country2303growing, things like hydrogen and CO2 infrastructure2304coming online, and extreme weather risks--and extreme--weather2305extremes increasing, the stakes really couldn't be higher.2306    We need PHMSA to ensure that we have the tools, the staff,2307and the authority to really prioritize safety and reduce leaks2308and protect a lot of our communities, as well as we experience2309this growth and this new demand for energy.2310    And so I think that what we really need to be asking2311ourselves is, How can we make real progress on pipeline safety2312without getting bogged down in partisanship, which is something2313that I have really stressed a lot on, being on the2314subcommittee? And so at the end of the day, this hearing is not2315just about policy, but it is really whether--about families can2316feel safe in their homes and businesses and whether or not we2317are going to have the energy that we needed.2318    And so I wanted to ask Mr. Caram, your organization often2319works across stakeholder lines. And I wanted to ask, like, what2320are two or three practical, bipartisan steps this committee2321could take in reauthorization that would increase pipeline2322safety and community trust but still be workable for the2323industry?2324    Mr. Caram. Yes, thank you so much for that question. Two2325things come to mind, both of which I mentioned briefly.2326    The first is in-home methane detectors or natural gas2327alarms. The NTSB has been recommending these devices for some2328time. There has been some disagreement as to whether that is2329really under PHMSA or a State program's jurisdiction, but I2330firmly believe that it is part of an operator's public2331awareness responsibilities and could be part of the public2332awareness regulations. And you know, this subcommittee could2333make that happen.2334    We saw in Japan, when they adopted widespread use of2335natural gas alarms, we saw the incidents decreased by 902336percent. I firmly believe that widespread adoption of natural2337gas alarms will make a meaningful difference quickly on2338fatalities from pipelines.2339    And another would be fire shutoff valves, or thermally2340activated shutoff valves. These would help mitigate the damage2341from a fire in a building that could be made worse by the2342presence of gas service. They are very simple, inexpensive2343devices. I believe they cost $75. They are required in2344Massachusetts already, and have been for some time.2345    A low melting point polymer keeps the valve open. When2346exposed to heat it automatically closes, and it would prevent2347gas from making that fire worse and fueling it. They don't2348require any ongoing maintenance, and they are very easy to2349install on existing service lines.2350    Mr. Veasey. Yes. I also wanted to ask you--we know that2351communities are more likely to push back on CO2 and2352hydrogen projects if they don't understand the risks or2353benefits. And we see--we now see this happening across the2354Midwest with the CO2 pipelines. What tools like2355mapping, early engagement, or postincident transparency can2356Congress support to build trust in these next-gen pipelines?2357    Mr. Caram. I think the biggest piece of building trust for2358this type of pipeline is improving the regulations. There are2359glaring regulatory gaps. Certain types of CO22360pipelines aren't covered by any minimum safety regulations. And2361the regulations that do apply, the pipelines that are covered2362by regulations, those regulations are--don't really address the2363unique physical properties and risks that CO2 pose.2364    So I think the biggest thing that could be done for2365building trust in these pipelines is modernizing the2366regulations.2367    Mr. Veasey. Yes. No, that makes sense.2368    And Mr. Chairman, as I get ready to close, I hope that too2369we can address this again to talk about how we can get the2370public more involved before something bad happens. Oftentimes2371something--it takes something really bad to happen before the2372public really gets engaged. We need to start looking at how we2373can get in front of a lot of these things and not just be2374responding to, you know, unfortunate situations.2375    I yield back. Thank you.2376    Mr. Latta. Thank you very much. The gentleman's time has2377expired, and he yields back. The Chair now recognizes the2378gentleman from Georgia's 12th District for 5 minutes for2379questions.2380    Mr. Allen. Thank you, Chair Latta, and thank you for2381holding this important hearing to discuss policy on expanding2382our pipeline capacity. I want to thank the witnesses for being2383here to testify.2384    Building up our pipeline capacity is critical to delivering2385affordable energy to our constituents across the country and2386our allies. We have heard from the witnesses that pipelines are2387the safest way to deliver energy. As we are working on2388modernizing the role of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials2389Safety Administration, or PHMSA, it is critical we ensure it2390works to enhance our pipeline infrastructure.2391    Mr. Moriarty----2392    Mr. Moriarty. Yes, sir.2393    Mr. Allen. You work in the local distribution of natural2394gas. Could you expand on how you get gas safely into2395communities, and the need to build up pipeline capacity to2396deliver low-cost energy to consumers?2397    Mr. Moriarty. Well, thank you very much for that question.2398I would like to answer it by an example.2399    Somerset County in Maryland did not have access to natural2400gas. The county there was desperate to get new energy delivered2401because of the economic development that would occur and the2402increase in employment. We worked closely with the community as2403well as with the State, and we now built a pipeline into2404Somerset County. So for the first time they have access to2405natural gas, which has led to more building, more2406manufacturing, and more jobs.2407    Mr. Allen. That is a great example, and thank you for that.2408    Mr. Black and Ms. Miller, you both mentioned the need to2409reform the special permit program. Can you share how reforming2410this program will expand pipeline infrastructure projects?2411    Mr. Black. The special permit program has been nearly2412broken by the application of unnecessary conditions that are2413unrelated to the waiver being requested, and they have taken2414too long. PHMSA should reform the special permit process, and2415Congress should tell them that they should.2416    Decision delays--decision deadlines, excuse me--and no2417extraneous conditions, how will that help? They are--one-size-2418fits-all regulations can't possibly apply to all the different2419types of conditions, operations, pipe that is out there. If we2420reform the special permit process, get people using it, have2421regulations that are suited to that specific pipe, that2422contributes to unleashing energy because we can have the pipe2423that we need to go where we need it to go.2424    Mr. Allen. OK, Ms. Miller?2425    Ms. Miller. I would echo what Mr. Black said. We agree that2426not only does the special permit program offer that2427opportunity, but I would point out as well that performance-2428based measures and PHMSA pipeline safety programming can allow2429for the evolving technology in order for more fit-for-purpose2430solutions.2431    Mr. Allen. OK. As a followup, how can PHMSA modernize the2432special permit process so operators can realize the intended2433benefits of the process?2434    Mr. Miller? Ms. Miller, I am sorry.2435    Ms. Miller. Thank you. I would actually--I defer to Mr.2436Black, who did such a nice job of describing the special permit2437program----2438    Mr. Allen. OK.2439    Ms. Miller [continuing]. And the opportunities for2440improving upon it. But we echo that there is an opportunity to2441allow for the fit-for-purpose solutions that bring better2442safety outcomes.2443    Mr. Allen. OK. Mr. Black?2444    Mr. Black. Congressman, no unrelated conditions. Deal with2445what the pipeline operator is requesting. Don't take this2446opportunity to impose something else. Do that through the2447regulatory process.2448    Second, have a decision deadline so that permits get ruled2449on and we get these changes made.2450    Mr. Allen. OK. All right. Ms. Miller, it is my2451understanding that you have some LNG members. I believe2452exporting LNG to our allies is key to our national security.2453    Can you share how updating pipeline safety programs would2454be beneficial to our LNG exports?2455    Ms. Miller. Having a greater supply available for export2456not only facilitates the export of that to our allies, but that2457also has environmental benefits because natural gas is a more2458environmentally friendly energy source. And energy demands, of2459course, are increasing around the world. Making that available2460across the world, our American natural gas around the world, it2461provides benefits for us all.2462    Mr. Allen. Yes, and this is a great opportunity for us to2463maybe reverse the trade deficit issues and other things that,2464obviously, the President is working on. Would that be correct?2465    Ms. Miller. I agree.2466    Mr. Allen. Yes, OK. All right. Well, thank you so much2467for--to you all for being here today.2468    And with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.2469    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back the balance2470of his time. The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from2471Washington's 8th District for 5 minutes for questions.2472    Ms. Schrier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our2473witnesses.2474    I want to start just by expressing how important pipeline2475safety is all over, but particularly in my home State. It has2476been about 26 years since the Olympic pipeline explosion in2477Bellingham, which is less than an hour from my district. And2478this tragedy killed three young people, injured eight more, and2479severely impacted the ecosystem and the nearby communities. And2480many of the safety protections and considerations currently in2481place stem from this tragedy. So I just wanted to remind us all2482why we are here and why PHMSA is so important.2483    I would love to just turn to hydrogen, a fuel that2484Washington State is heavily investing in. Mr. Moriarty, in your2485testimony you discussed the role that your utility plays in the2486Mid-Atlantic Hydrogen Hub. I was wondering if you could discuss2487the economic opportunities that this hub will bring to your2488region.2489    Mr. Moriarty. Thank you for that question.2490    There was a great deal of excitement when MACH2 was2491announced, which is our hydrogen hub in Delaware, Pennsylvania,2492New Jersey. Our role as a company was going to be to use our2493Safety Town, which is where we have built little houses and2494little facilities. And I say little, it is just--all the2495appliances that you would use are in there. And we use that to2496train our employees but also to train first responders.2497    Our role at MACH2 was going to be to blend hydrogen into2498those energy sources to see how they reacted, and then to help2499train our folks and others to do that. So there was a great2500deal of excitement when it first started.2501    Ms. Schrier. That is really cool, that MACH2 has Safety2502Town there to do practice and drills, and I think it all makes2503all of us feel better.2504    We also were very excited about--and we are very excited2505about being a hydrogen hub in Washington State. In particular2506in Washington, where we have 70 percent of our power comes from2507hydropower, there it is clean hydrogen, which is particularly2508exciting. It is a way to store that excess energy.2509    And it is one of the reasons I am so disappointed that this2510administration and House Republicans are undermining the2511efforts toward hydrogen, which is our--one of our important2512future fuels. When they deliberated about the One Big, Ugly2513Bill, they slashed tax credits for clean energy, including2514weakening the 45V clean hydrogen tax credit, which is crucial2515to get this nascent hydrogen industry off the ground. And both2516MACH2 and the Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Hub may be on the2517chopping block, according to some leaked documents.2518    I will also note that one of the largest hydrogen hubs is2519in Texas, and that these exist in red States and blue States2520and all over, and we need to be thinking about the future.2521    For the purposes of this hearing and safety, I just wanted2522to discuss again the knowledge gaps that we still need to fill2523in, in terms of how to integrate hydrogen fuel into the2524existing pipeline systems and infrastructure through blending2525and later, hopefully, maybe even on its own. And these safety2526issues have not been fully discussed.2527    Mr. Caram, it is good to see you again. We talked about2528some of these unknowns the last time you were here and why2529further studies are needed to evaluate what modifications are2530needed to existing infrastructure to be compatible with2531hydrogen. We didn't know a ton at the time. It has been about a2532year. We still haven't passed PHMSA reauthorization with a2533hydrogen blending study to address these safety concerns.2534    And I was wondering if you could speak to the urgency of2535this, the consequences of not filling those knowledge gaps2536sooner rather than later.2537    Mr. Caram. Yes, thank you for the question.2538    At this point operators do not need to report to anyone,2539including PHMSA or their State regulator, if they are blending2540hydrogen into their system, as long as it is below 50 percent.2541So we don't really know how urgent this is because we are not2542aware of how many operators are blending hydrogen into existing2543systems.2544    I will say that the knowledge gaps and research gaps and2545regulatory gaps that we discussed last time are largely still2546present. There hasn't been a lot of progress made, as far as I2547know.2548    Ms. Schrier. Well, I hope the way we discover the problems2549isn't through a catastrophe at Safety Town and figuring out2550where there are gaps in our knowledge and pipelines. So I want2551to thank you, and I will yield back unless you want to use2552those 6 seconds.2553    You looked too eager to say something. No?2554    OK, I will yield back. Thank you.2555    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back, and the2556Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Iowa's 1st District2557for 5 minutes for questions.2558    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you so much, Chairman Latta and2559Ranking Member Castor, for holding this important hearing on2560pipeline safety.2561    American energy dominance requires modern pipeline2562infrastructure and effective regulations that truly consider2563the cost benefit of additional bureaucratic barriers. These2564pipelines heat our homes and power our farms. They deliver2565energy affordably and safely across the country, making modern2566life possible. To think if we replaced every pipeline with a2567semi tractor trailer truck, tanker, or railcar, how much more2568safety would be put at risk?2569    We need clear Federal standards, not 20-year-old rules that2570ignore modern technology and innovation. This isn't2571complicated. Focus on actual safety. Streamline permitting.2572American energy security depends on building the2573infrastructure, and that means smart, targeted policies, not2574one-size-fits-all mandates that threaten reliability and2575investment.2576    And to your point, Mr. Moriarty, I have--since I have been2577in Congress, which was January 3, 2021--have been talking with2578two of my counties in southeast Iowa along the Mississippi2579River who desperately want more pipeline natural gas delivered2580to them, and it is absolutely affecting economic growth. And2581they have lost businesses relocating there because of this2582issue.2583    Mr. Black, your members use advanced technologies for leak2584detection voluntarily. Why is flexibility important in allowing2585operators to deploy the right technology for their specific2586systems, rather than having a prospective mandate from the2587Federal Government?2588    Mr. Black. Well, first, technology, Congresswoman. There2589are lots of different types of pipelines. There are ones that2590have many laterals and many injection points and takeoffs, and2591there are ones that just go one direction. It is important to2592have a leak detection program that reflects the characteristics2593of that system. If there are prescriptive regulations, first,2594those might become quickly obsolescent by advancing technology.2595Second, they might not reflect the unique characteristics of2596that pipeline.2597    Right now PHMSA inspects pipeline operators, asks them2598about how they are approaching their pipeline system, and has2599that type of conversation. That is the way that it should be.2600    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. So it is sort of like the Federal2601Government telling a farmer how much input, how much pesticide,2602fungicide, fertilizer, when to harvest, when to plant, not2603knowing when the corn is dry, when the ground is ready, how2604much rain they are expecting, and if there is flooding.2605    Mr. Black. That sounds right.2606    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. OK, thank you.2607    Mr. Moriarty, Congress mandated a safety program for idled2608pipelines in 2020, but it hasn't been implemented. As an2609operator, what unique risks do idled pipelines pose, and why do2610we need Federal standards?2611    Mr. Moriarty. Thank you for that question.2612    Idle pipelines are wasted capacity that could be repurposed2613for other uses. We try to ensure that all the pipelines that we2614have are fully utilized and they are safe. I think when you2615idle a pipeline and it is not being used, you just raise the2616risks of safety with those pipelines.2617    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Again for Mr. Moriarty, you describe2618sophisticated cybersecurity measures at Chesapeake. How can2619PHMSA support industry-led cybersecurity efforts without2620creating duplicative regulations with TSA and other agency2621requirements?2622    Mr. Moriarty. Well, thank you very much.2623    Cybersecurity is one of the top risks that face companies2624like ours. We have invested a great deal in a cyber team. We2625have one of the best in the country, and we are very, very2626proud of that. We have attacks daily from nation states and2627others. We have partners at the FBI and other places that we2628deal with where we share information.2629    I think if PHMSA were to step in, we would want a holistic2630approach, because time is of the essence when you are dealing2631with a cyber event.2632    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Thank you.2633    And Ms. Miller, CO2 has been used for enhanced2634oil recovery for decades, helping maximize domestic energy2635production. Can you explain how CO2 infrastructure2636supports traditional oil and gas operations and why it is2637important for American energy security?2638    Ms. Miller. Thank you for that question.2639    Actually, few of the GPA Midstream members currently2640operate or are planning to operate CO2 pipelines,2641but we recognize the importance of having the pipelines2642available to solve and support some of the environmental2643opportunities available in the industry.2644    We do support strong pipeline safety for all pipelines,2645including CO2, and we would support PHMSA's process2646to establish those rules properly.2647    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. Are there risks associated with the2648CO2 pipeline versus other pipelines if proper safety2649protocols are put in place?2650    Ms. Miller. I am not--I would have to follow up for you,2651but I would be happy to.2652    Mrs. Miller-Meeks. All right. Thank you so much.2653    I yield back.2654    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair2655now recognizes the gentleman from California's 15th District2656for 5 minutes for questions.2657    Mr. Mullin. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all of2658our witnesses today. This is an incredibly important topic to2659my district.2660    Fifteen years ago, a natural gas pipeline exploded in the2661Glenview neighborhood of San Bruno, just a few miles from my2662home in south San Francisco. Eyewitnesses said that the2663fireball shot over 1,000 feet into the air. The blast killed 82664people, injured dozens more, and destroyed or damaged more than2665100 homes. The impact on the community was devastating and long2666lasting, and it is exactly why we need to get this right.2667    An NTSB report concluded that ``no one knew whether the2668pipeline under San Bruno was safe. Not the utility, not the2669State regulators, and not the Federal regulators.'' They went2670on to call it a failure of the entire system, a system of2671checks and balances that should have prevented this disaster.2672    So Mr. Caram, can you walk us through the root causes of2673the 2010 San Bruno explosion, specifically the organizational2674breakdowns and regulatory gaps that allowed such a catastrophe2675to occur?2676    Mr. Caram. Well, I can do my best. It has been a little2677while since I have looked at that NTSB report. But seeing--I2678recognize we are coming up on 15 years in September, and my2679heart goes out to that community and your community.2680    There was a section of pipe up there that I don't think a2681lot of operators would consider pipe. And because of the lack2682of initial testing standards, you know, requiring to pressure2683test that pipe, it was never allowed to fail under that hydro2684test to discover that it wasn't capable of handling that2685pressure of natural gas. A lot of that came from acquisitions2686and lack of record keeping through acquisitions from company to2687company.2688    And so the NTSB report had a long list of recommendations2689on how operators could get to know their system to make sure2690that they would be able to identify if there were that kind of2691rogue pipe somewhere in their system susceptible to fail.2692    And PHMSA has--it took a long time, but they have enacted a2693series of rulemakings in response to those recommendations, and2694there are some real improvements in those regulations that they2695have passed. Unfortunately, because of the nonapplication2696clause and cost benefit, not all of the NTSB recommendations2697were able to be implemented by PHMSA, some of those key2698recommendations.2699    Mr. Mullin. Thank you for that.2700    So under the Trump administration, PHMSA's enforcement2701actions have dropped to record lows. And nearly all of the2702agency's senior career staff has left. The agency has also2703delayed publishing a rule on gas leaks.2704    Instead of prioritizing safety, unfortunately, the2705administration has proposed slashing budget by $16 million and2706threatened to withhold funding from your organization, Mr.2707Caram, the Pipeline Safety Trust.2708    So given all of that, my question is to you again, sir:2709What does Congress need to do to ensure that pipelines are2710actually safer today than they were 15 years ago?2711    Mr. Caram. I think Congress serves a critical oversight2712role of authorizing the appropriate level of funding,2713appropriating that funding, and then overseeing how they are2714implementing the Pipeline Safety Act. Hearings such as this can2715do that. Hearings with PHMSA would be helpful, as well.2716    Congress asked PHMSA to--in its oversight role asked PHMSA2717to produce a web chart showing its progress towards all of the2718mandates towards rulemaking and required that that be updated2719on a monthly basis. And I think that is a key piece of2720oversight. It is also key for members of the public to really2721see where those rulemakings are prioritized. And the last time2722I checked, that hadn't been updated since January.2723    Mr. Mullin. I appreciate the renewed attention on this.2724Thank you all for your testimony.2725    And with that I yield back, Mr. Chair.2726    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back the balance2727of his time, and the Chair now recognizes the gentleman from2728South Carolina's 7th District for 5 minutes for questions.2729    Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a fascinating2730hearing, and I really appreciate the witnesses for being here.2731    I am struck a little bit by some of the commentary from the2732other side of the dais that there is a perceived lack of2733enforcement. Mr. Black, earlier with--in a dialog with Mr.2734Pfluger you talked about two different sessions, if you will.2735    What did you mean by that? And could you expand upon that2736when it comes to enforcement?2737    Mr. Black. A couple of months ago, PHMSA's Office of Chief2738Counsel issued publicly a guidance on how this administration2739is going to be enforcing pipeline safety. Congress in the 20202740Act had said that more due process needed to be provided to2741respondents, and so that was part of it.2742    Before that series of memos from the Chief Counsel, there2743were public reports that numbers were down. Since then, the2744numbers of enforcement activities are higher. I don't think it2745is the numbers that matter to me. We look at, is PHMSA on the2746case on major incidents? Do pipeline operators recognize that2747PHMSA is going to deter unsafe pipeline operations? Pipeline2748operators absolutely know that PHMSA has that authority, and2749they are not thinking that this is--they are recognizing that2750we still face enforcement potential from PHMSA.2751    Mr. Fry. So you are not--maybe the Chicken Little exercise2752that we heard from the other side about the sky is falling,2753you--what you are saying is that you don't think that the2754current numbers substantiate that allegation.2755    Mr. Black. Correct. And I am not sure if numbers are the2756right way to do it. On the Keystone there was an action, there2757was a quick corrective action order telling the pipeline2758operator change its operations until PHMSA approved it. That is2759the type of activity PHMSA is supposed to do.2760    Mr. Fry. Mr. Black, who was the head of PHMSA under the2761Biden administration?2762    Mr. Black. It was Tristan Brown, the Deputy Administrator.2763There was no confirmed administrator.2764    Mr. Fry. Why is that?2765    Mr. Black. We don't know. In my time, there had never been2766an administration that failed to nominate an Administrator.2767    Mr. Fry. Well, I mean, we have all seen that the President,2768the former President, was kind of asleep at the wheel for most2769of his administration. So what you are saying is that there was2770no actual head. There was a Deputy Administrator, but no one2771that was nominated by the White House to be in the role.2772    Mr. Black. Correct.2773    Mr. Fry. Is that the same today, or is there an actual----2774    Mr. Black. There is a nominee, Paul Roberti, from the2775President to be the Senate-confirmed head of PHMSA, and he had2776his confirmation hearing last week. And we hope he is adopted.2777We think it is better for PHMSA to have Senate-confirmed2778leadership to be able to work with the Congress.2779    Mr. Fry. What is your understanding, Mr. Black, of the2780budget of PHMSA under the 2025 fiscal year? What do--do you2781know roughly what that number is?2782    Mr. Black. No, but I understand that the President's budget2783request is the same as it was in the last year.2784    Mr. Fry. Do you--would it--$280 million, does that sound2785about right----2786    Mr. Black. Yes, sir.2787    Mr. Fry [continuing]. For fiscal year 2025?2788    Mr. Black. Yes.2789    Mr. Fry. How much of an increase do you think that that is2790from, say, fiscal year 2023?2791    Mr. Black. I don't know.2792    Mr. Fry. Seventy-three million dollars.2793    Mr. Black. Right.2794    Mr. Fry. So you have seen a dramatic--so when we talk about2795scaling back funding or saving the taxpayers money, this isn't2796a scenario where their budget has been flat for years and they2797are receiving a cut. In fact, they received a 50 percent2798increase just 2 years prior to that.2799    So again, when we are talking about funding, I think it is2800important to understand the context of that funding and where2801these funding mechanisms came from. Do you agree?2802    Mr. Black. Yes. If we think PHMSA should be focused on2803pipeline safety, should have qualified personnel with STEM2804experience and pipeline operations expertise, if it takes2805Congress giving PHMSA extra help, we are ready to have them do2806that. We want PHMSA to have the resources that it needs.2807    Mr. Fry. To do the job of the original mission, perhaps.2808    Mr. Black. Focus on pipeline safety, yes.2809    Mr. Fry. Correct, not the other ancillary things. I mean,2810they have kind of become a de facto EPA, if you will, under at2811least the Biden administration.2812    Mr. Black. The emphasis was not there, right? There were2813congressional mandates, say, on idled pipe that were just not2814issued during the last administration, and they bungled the2815implementation of the Pipeline Safety Technology Demonstration2816program. We hope that this PHMSA will be focused on the right2817things.2818    Mr. Fry. Thank you for that.2819    Ms. Miller, one example of PHMSA regulations not keeping2820pace with modern-day conditions is the class location2821regulations, which have been--which have not been updated in2822about 50 years.2823    Do you agree that population changes around pipelines2824necessitate changes to existing laws? And would those changes2825enhance pipeline safety?2826    Ms. Miller. We believe that they are opportunities to2827ensure that risk assessments, including cross location2828analysis, is done to ensure that the right priorities are--and2829resources are made available for the highest priority safety2830results. So yes.2831    Mr. Fry. Thank you. PHMSA should also integrate efficiency2832and flexibility into the regulations to incentivize PHMSA to2833modernize. Would PHMSA integrating more integrity management2834principles into class location regulations elevate safety2835standards across more miles of pipelines?2836    Ms. Miller. We believe it would. Performance-based measures2837across not only interstate pipelines but also for gathering and2838processing--I am sorry, gathering and local pipelines would2839matter, as well.2840    Mr. Fry. Thank you for that, Mr. Chairman, and I yield2841back.2842    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired, and2843the Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from California's 7th2844District for 5 minutes for questions.2845    Ms. Matsui. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want2846to thank the witnesses for being here today.2847    Now, the safe operation of our Nation's pipelines should be2848an urgent priority for this committee, but it has now been2849almost 2 years since its authorization expired for the Pipeline2850and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.2851    PHMSA is crucial for protecting communities from deadly2852pipeline accidents, but Republicans on this committee clearly2853don't see this as a priority. Instead of working towards a2854commonsense reauthorization of PHMSA, Republicans wasted the2855last 2 years trying to force through an extreme partisan bill2856that would cut pipeline safety by 18 percent.2857    Now, under President Trump, I am gravely concerned that2858pipeline safety has been caught in a broader Republican effort2859to roll back critical safety and pollution regulations across2860the Federal Government. As my colleagues have discussed,2861multiple senior officials at PHMSA resigned or having been2862pushed out of the agency. There has been a sharp decline, drop2863in the number of enforcement actions taken by PHMSA, and2864President Trump has rescinded critical pipeline safety rules.2865    Now, Mr. Caram, I want to keep this very simple. Are these2866actions going to increase or decrease the likelihood of a2867deeply--pipeline disaster?2868    Mr. Caram. Thank you for that.2869    As I stated before, I believe strong regulations and2870effective enforcement are critical to pipeline safety, and2871actions that erode those, I fear, will hurt pipeline safety.2872    Ms. Matsui. Exactly. Mr. Caram, this looks like a2873deliberate effort to cripple PHMSA's capacity to act as an2874effective safety regulator in order to benefit the oil and gas2875industry. Would you disagree?2876    Mr. Caram. I can't speculate as to the motivations behind2877the actions.2878    Ms. Matsui. OK. It is not just PHMSA. This is part of a2879pattern. EPA staff has been told not to enforce pollution2880rules. The Department of Energy has been ordered to stop2881enforcing efficiency standards. The Department of Labor has2882been ordered to stop enforcing antidiscrimination laws. This is2883a deliberate, coordinated effort to weaken the protections that2884keep us safe.2885    Now, I want to focus on the new rule for carbon dioxide2886pipelines for a moment because I think it demonstrates this2887point. As you mentioned in your testimony, it has now been 52888years since the CO2 pipeline disaster in Mississippi2889that sent 45 people to the hospital. PHMSA proposed new rules2890to prevent this disaster from happening again, but President2891Trump immediately withdrew the new rule just as new2892CO2 pipelines are being built across the country.2893    Mr. Caram, can you briefly describe some of the unique2894challenges and concerns surrounding the carbon dioxide2895pipelines?2896    Mr. Caram. Sure. So CO2 is an asphyxiate, and it2897is heavier than air, and it is usually transported in a2898pipeline in a dense phase. In the event of a pipeline rupture,2899large amounts of CO2 can escape from the pipeline,2900and it can move in long distances close to the ground in2901dangerous and even lethal concentrations. It is odorless. It2902can be invisible, making it really difficult to detect. So all2903of these unique physical properties really present unique risks2904relative to other types of pipelines and unique emergency2905response challenges, as well.2906    Ms. Matsui. But how do the proposed--the new proposed rules2907for CO2 pipelines address these challenges?2908    Mr. Caram. Well, it proposed new standards to ensure that2909ruptures would be less likely to occur, like stronger2910construction and design standards and real-time monitoring. It2911also made sure that all parts of the pipeline where a failure2912could affect a community would be subject to stricter safety2913standards, and it also made improvements to an operator's2914responsibility to ensure strong emergency response.2915    Ms. Matsui. So does the President's decision to kill this2916rule make communities more safe or less safe?2917    Mr. Caram. Well, if it is between finalizing the proposed2918rule or not modernizing the regulations, not modernizing the2919regulations makes----2920    Ms. Matsui. So it would be less----2921    Mr. Caram [continuing]. Makes communities less safe.2922    Ms. Matsui. Less safe. Mr. Caram, without new safety rules,2923will we see another tragedy like the disaster in Mississippi?2924    Mr. Caram. I certainly hope not. We will be relying on2925operators to follow voluntary industry standards instead of the2926law.2927    Ms. Matsui. OK. Let me just talk about hydrogen blending.2928Blending hydrogen into natural gas pipelines also prevents new2929safety concerns that need to be addressed. Mr. Caram, can you2930briefly describe some of the unique challenges and concerns2931with hydrogen blending?2932    Mr. Caram. Sure----2933    Mr. Latta. In about 5 seconds.2934    [Laughter.]2935    Mr. Caram. I am not sure I can do that in 5 seconds.2936    Ms. Matsui. OK.2937    Mr. Latta. Could the lady submit the question to the2938witness?2939    Ms. Matsui. I certainly could.2940    Mr. Latta. In writing.2941    Ms. Matsui. Thank you very much.2942    Mr. Latta. Thank you very much. Thank you. The Chair now2943recognizes the gentlelady from Florida's 15th District for 52944minutes for questions.2945    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our2946witnesses for being here with us today.2947    As American demand for energy continues to grow, it is2948essential that our pipeline infrastructure is prepared to meet2949this need. Pipelines are critical for transporting oil, natural2950gas, and our other energy resources.2951    My home State of Florida is a large producer of electricity2952and relies heavily on pipelines to deliver energy, so I2953appreciate your testimony and the discussion.2954    Mr. Moriarty, I would like to return to something you said2955just a few moments ago. You mentioned that one of the top risks2956you perceived for pipeline safety is, in fact, cybersecurity.2957Would you share with us a bit more about the cyber threat2958landscape you are seeing and how you are partnering with2959Federal agencies like the FBI and CISA to meet that threat?2960    Mr. Moriarty. Thank you very much for the question.2961    I guess what I would say to start with is because of the2962cyber threat we took our SCADA system, which is responsible for2963the operation--safe operations of our systems, we took that off2964our corporate system and we put it into what we call a DMZ2965zone, which means nobody can get access to it. So even if there2966is a breach somewhere on our system, it won't get into the2967pipeline's safe operation.2968    Every day we have threats. We have a scoreboard where we2969see threats coming in in real time. Most--because of the2970investments we have made, most of those are stopped before they2971become a real threat. However, if there is a threat, it is2972sequestered and then is studied by our team. And then we report2973that to the various authorities--the FBI and others--and we2974have briefings constantly with the Federal partners to help us2975address this.2976    Ms. Lee. And Mr. Black, in your written testimony you2977recommended the authorization of a voluntary information-2978sharing program. In his confirmation hearing, PHMSA nominee2979Paul Roberti emphasized the importance of information sharing,2980specifically on cybersecurity.2981    Would you share with us more your perspective on that2982subject?2983    Mr. Black. We have a great opportunity to do for pipelines2984what FAA has done to improve safety in aviation. In the 20162985pipeline reauthorization law, Congress said PHMSA should form a2986public advisory--an advisory committee to come up with2987recommendations on how to develop this type of program. That2988work has been done, and it is ready for Congress to help2989authorize it.2990    The benefit would be that pipeline operators, safety2991advocates, and government could all talk about incidents and2992lessons in a safe space so we are not concerned about antitrust2993violations, we are not concerned about the information getting2994out into the wrong hands. It has really been successful in2995aviation, where pilots, machinists, anybody is able to get that2996information with the focus on improving pipeline safety.2997    So if Congress can enact voluntary information-sharing2998systems similar to what the advisory committee done--did, we2999will be able to do that type of a program that the NTSB and3000others will be cheering us on.3001    Ms. Lee. And I think it is important to explore something3002you just touched on, which is the concept of being able to3003share that kind of information in a safe space. Would you3004elaborate a little bit more on the types of things that can3005happen if we don't create an environment like that --for3006example, the information falling into the wrong hands--and how3007that can exacerbate a vulnerability?3008    Or, you know, the other potential consequences you face if3009we don't have a clear framework for sharing that kind of risk3010or even breach or incident information.3011    Mr. Black. So pipeline operators themselves maintain a lot3012of different programs for sharing information. We want to learn3013from an incident and get better across the entire industry.3014    But there is a limitation right now in being able to have3015that discussion with government or to have the Pipeline Safety3016Trust in the room. You want pipeline operators to--and anybody3017in the industry to be able to contribute that information and3018understand that that is going to be considered confidentially,3019it is not going to be misused against you in enforcement. There3020should be enforcement cases going on, but nothing in here3021should invoke that so that we can do safety.3022    Right now, government isn't allowed to be a part of those3023discussions right now because they would have to put that3024information out on the street if asked. It has been successful3025in aviation. Let's do it for pipelines.3026    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.3027    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back the3028balance of her time. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman3029from New York's 20th District for 5 minutes for questions.3030    Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and welcome to our3031panelists.3032    While I hope we can reach consensus on a bipartisan3033pipeline safety reauthorization, I have my doubts because3034recent history has shown that Republicans never miss an3035opportunity to promote fossil fuel industry interests. And we3036failed to reach agreement on a bipartisan bill last Congress,3037unlike our colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure3038Committee, because Republicans couldn't help themselves but to3039include extraneous provisions intended to promote oil and gas.3040    And that dedication to fossil fuels led President Trump and3041congressional Republicans to end critical tax credits for3042fossil fuels' biggest competitors: renewables in the3043electricity sector and EVs in the transportation sector. This3044happened despite the fact that numerous independent analyses3045found that the Republicans' proposal will raise America's3046energy bills by more than $100 annually in the near term,3047growing to more than $400 within a decade.3048    So during our last markup of energy bills, members of the3049majority continue to invoke the Keystone XL Pipeline,3050suggesting that the Obama and Biden administrations killed3051jobs. But after the Big, Ugly Bill, it has become crystal clear3052who actually cares about American energy jobs. Don't take my3053word for it, listen to the people who construct both renewable3054and pipeline projects. North America's building trades unions3055call the Republicans' Big, Ugly Bill--and I quote--``the3056biggest job-killing bill in the history of this country.'' It3057is the equivalent of terminating more than 1,000 Keystone XL3058Pipeline projects.3059    So all of these years later, Republicans want to continue3060to relitigate Keystone while enacting a bill that will kill an3061estimated 1.75 million construction jobs, translating to $1483062billion in lost annual wages and benefits for American workers.3063    But, Mr. Caram, I want to try to highlight a couple of3064issues at PHMSA that may affect its ability to ensure safe3065operations of pipeline infrastructure. Your testimony noted3066that insufficient resources have resulted in PHMSA lacking3067technical capabilities, causing the agency to be overly reliant3068on regulated entities' technical expertise to carry out its3069responsibilities. This is an extremely troubling trend being3070implemented across many agencies by the Trump administration.3071    Starving important, lifesaving regulatory agencies of3072skilled personnel and resources is a surefire way to allow3073corporate entities to cut corners at the expense of everyday3074Americans and our collective public interests. We are seeing3075this playbook be executed right now as the Trump administration3076works to eliminate EPA's Office of Research and Development and3077lay off hundreds of chemists, toxicologists, and other3078scientists.3079    And that is because these public servants produce3080independent science that regulated industries often don't like.3081Polluters want their regulators to be toothless, to rely upon3082them for science, and to lack the capacity to verify industry-3083produced studies, or enforce rules.3084    So Mr. Caram, I think you might suggest that there has been3085an historic funding challenge at PHMSA, limiting its ability to3086be an effective, independent safety regulator.3087    But do you have a sense of whether things will get better3088or worse if Congress further reduces PHMSA funding3089authorization levels as was proposed by committee Republicans3090just a few years ago?3091    Mr. Caram. Yes, I would have to imagine they would get3092worse.3093    Mr. Tonko. So I thank you for that, and I want to highlight3094another disturbing trend being advanced by the Trump3095administration and Republicans in Congress.3096    Between the ongoing appropriations process and the Big,3097Ugly Bill, Federal budget cuts are pushing more and more costs3098onto State governments, which will require States to fill3099funding gaps or be forced to cut benefits and services.3100    So, Mr. Caram, am I correct that States are partners in the3101effort to conduct inspections and oversight of pipelines?3102    Mr. Caram. Yes. The vast majority of the pipeline mileage3103in this country are under State jurisdiction for inspections3104and enforcement.3105    Mr. Tonko. And if that commitment by the Feds is reduced,3106what happens to the States?3107    Mr. Caram. Yes, State programs, as we have heard throughout3108this hearing, are in need of that funding. They can get up to310980 percent of their pipeline safety program reimbursed by3110Federal funds through that State grant program. And3111historically, they have not come close to that 80 percent.3112    Mr. Tonko. So if States are unwilling or unable to cover3113more of the costs to be effective partners, will that make3114Americans more or less safe from potential pipeline risks?3115    Mr. Caram. I would imagine safe--less safe.3116    Mr. Tonko. Less safe, so not an outcome that we should all3117be working towards. So if we can avoid that, we should do our3118best to do so.3119    With that, I thank you and I yield back, Mr. Chair.3120    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back the balance3121of his time. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio's31226th District for 5 minutes for questions.3123    [Pause.]3124    Mr. Rulli. I am pretty loud. I will just speak.3125    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My attention will be directed at3126Andy Black.3127    I hope you are doing well today. So thank you for your3128support in liquid energy. I really appreciate that. My district3129really much relies on it. So several points of focus on how3130safe pipelines could actually make the Ohio 6th a better place3131to live is we are--now have a project of a cracker plant which3132will mimic the Monaca cracker plant, which is across the border3133in Pennsylvania.3134    It is a $12.5 billion project. A lot of union jobs will be3135building that. It is very exciting. It is going to crack the3136gas into butane, propane, heavy gas, liquid gas, all kinds of3137exciting things.3138    In the Ohio Senate I was instrumental in building three3139gas-powered generating plants. It was a thrill of mine. We3140right now have about $40 billion worth of potential investors3141that are going to come to the Ohio 6th, and we are going to3142build 6 or 7 more of these. And so what is going to happen is3143the Ohio Senate right now has Senate Bill 2, which is the3144energy bill, which is going to direct State money to coexist3145with Federal money as a united force to developing energy.3146    Data centers are coming up, AI advancement centers are3147coming up, and general manufacturing is coming all along the3148Ohio River. Pipelines support this industry and sometimes run3149through the--our neighborhoods, and they need to be safe.3150    One of the most exciting things is the evolution of the3151pipelines that I have seen in my career. And the development of3152what you call the smart pipeline, which I think most of the3153public is ignorant on--smart pipelines actually allow for a3154safer progress of moving gas around through these3155neighborhoods.3156    The Liquid and Gas Pipeline Advisory Committees were3157created decades ago with the help of PHMSA on safety rulemaking3158and policy development. What is your personal perspective on3159the value of these advisory committees and their existence with3160safe pipelines?3161    Mr. Black. Well, the project that you mentioned in Ohio and3162those in the Marcellus are great, wonderful examples to create3163jobs, to benefit, and to not have to take it all down to the3164Gulf Coast, right? So it is great for our country to have that3165flexibility.3166    The advisory committees were created by Congress to make3167regulations better, right? Any proposal that PHMSA has needs to3168go to the gas or liquid or sometimes both, and that can make3169for a good exchange on helping people understand how a3170regulation should be modified to be more feasible, practical,3171economical.3172    So it is good that we have those advisory committees, and3173we would look forward to future regulations going there.3174    Mr. Rulli. I think that is really exciting. I think that3175making these committees even more strong is really what the3176exciting part is. Right now these committees are meeting four3177times a year. In your personal opinion, do you think that needs3178to happen more frequently?3179    And what better ways can we put to have guardrails inside3180these committees to have more safety, more rulemaking, more3181compliance to industry so the industry becomes a safer process?3182    Mr. Black. I know some of my gas colleagues believe it is3183important to have a certain number of advisory committees. To3184me, quality is more important than quantity. Let's make sure3185those advisory committee members are up to speed, not just on3186regulation but also on technological developments, so that3187everybody understands what the latest possibilities are. That3188may take more meetings.3189    Mr. Rulli. Do you think it is possible that we could take3190the political bent away from these advisory committees so it3191could be more of a bipartisan approach where everyone's voice3192could actually be represented in the committee, and nobody3193would feel left out or threatened to be part of this process?3194    Mr. Black. Yes, they are constructed that way, and they3195should be. Yes, sir.3196    Mr. Rulli. Well, I thank you so much for your thoughts on3197this.3198    And with that, Chair, I yield my time.3199    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields his time back,3200and the Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from New York's320114th District for 5 minutes for questions.3202    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.3203    Mr. Caram, I want to touch on something that you mentioned3204in your written testimony, which is that pipeline safety law3205currently prevents the Pipeline Hazardous Material Safety3206Administration, or PHMSA, which we are discussing today, from3207imposing safety regulations on existing pipelines. And that3208was, frankly, shocking to me. It means that it will be a3209monumental task to make the existing 3.3 million miles of3210pipelines in our communities safer.3211    Can you talk about how this requirement prevents us from3212making the most dangerous pipelines in America safer?3213    And should we look at altering that requirement in any3214reauthorization of PHMSA?3215    Mr. Caram. Yes, thank you for that question. The Pipeline3216Safety Act passed by Congress has a section in it, a provision,3217where it says that the design--any design, construction, or3218initial testing standards adopted by PHMSA cannot apply to3219existing pipelines, only new and replaced pipelines.3220    So, you know, operational regulations and things like that3221can apply to existing pipelines, but those, you know, initial3222testing design and construction standards cannot. And what that3223means in practice is that PHMSA has been unable to make certain3224lifesaving regulatory changes, including those recommended by3225the NTSB after tragedies like San Bruno, like requiring rupture3226mitigation valves in high-consequence areas that we know would3227save lives.3228    So in practice this permanently exempts about half of the3229Nation's pipelines from--and including those at the highest3230risk--from meeting critical modern safety standards.3231    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you. Thank you so much, Mr. Caram.3232And as you mentioned, it is important to highlight something3233that--you said half of pipelines in the U.S. are essentially3234blocked from having these additional safety standards for3235communities and workers on them--in--and being updated to be3236safer.3237    Ms. Miller, you represent an association of pipeline3238companies. And I see here in your testimony that it states that3239your members ``appreciate improved due process'' for companies3240that violate the laws as a priority. I want to discuss the3241consequences for pipeline companies when they fail to follow3242the law and PHMSA's rules.3243    Just over 5 years ago, an employee of Energy Transfer, a3244pipeline company and a member of your organization, was killed3245while conducting maintenance activities on a gas pipeline in3246Kansas. This employee was attempting to remove an object that3247had become stuck due to ice in a partly pressurized pipeline.3248Now, PHMSA's rules require operators to completely depressurize3249pipelines before working on them. But this worker was3250attempting to remove the object using a steel rod. When the3251object became dislodged, and due to remaining pressure in the3252pipeline--struck him in the abdomen and killed him.3253    Now, Energy Transfer is in court, arguing that it should3254not be held to account for the fact that it did not follow3255PHMSA's rules. Mr. Chair, I seek unanimous consent to enter3256into the record a complaint brought by the Attorney General in3257the Northern District Court of Texas.3258    Mr. Latta. Without objection, so ordered.3259    [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]3260    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. This complaint states that ``PHMSA's3261investigation indicates that Energy Transfer failed to follow3262its manual of written procedures for conducting operations and3263maintenance activities at the border station in connection with3264this fatal incident.''3265    Someone died. Now one of the biggest companies in the3266industry, Energy Transfer, is in court arguing that PHMSA3267shouldn't be able to hold any company that violates its rules3268responsible.3269    Ms. Miller, you mentioned due process for companies that3270violate laws in your testimony as a priority. In your opinion,3271if a pipeline company does not follow the rules and a worker is3272killed, should PHMSA be able to hold that company responsible?3273    Ms. Miller. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman. I3274would say that any specific questions about energy transfers3275and litigation, I would have to defer to them. But for GPA3276Midstream members, generally speaking, we do encourage that our3277members are able to rely on a strong enforcement protocol and3278that it is executed in a way that is transparent and complies3279with law, due process being part of that, to ensure that they3280are--that there are----3281    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I apologize. I only have 15 seconds3282left. Should PHMSA be able to hold the companies responsible?3283    Ms. Miller. We do believe that PHMSA should be a strong3284enforcement agency and equitably apply its rules across the3285industry.3286    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. OK, great. So they should be able to3287hold these companies responsible, and yet we are in an3288environment where the Trump administration and their3289enforcement actions against pipeline companies----3290    Mr. Latta. I am sorry, the gentlelady's time has expired.3291    Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Sure, thank you. Thank you.3292    Mr. Latta. Thank you very much. The Chair now recognizes3293the gentleman from Colorado's 8th District for 5 minutes for3294questions.3295    Mr. Evans. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Ranking Member. Of course,3296also to our witnesses for coming.3297    Again, you heard Colorado's 8th congressional district, so3298we have got 80 percent of the oil, 50 percent of the natural3299gas in Colorado. That is from the hole in the ground, through3300midstream, through--we have got the only refinery in Colorado,3301and then final distribution to the end users. And so a lot of3302that, obviously, happens through pipelines.3303    And we know, you know, we have heard in the commentary3304today, pipelines--safest way to move this liquid energy around3305in terms of accidents.3306    I want to make sure we also highlight the emissions. We had3307an incident in Colorado where some of our--some of that local3308distribution that relies on the pipelines went down during a3309really, really hard freeze. And so to backfill all of that3310energy that couldn't be transported via pipeline for a few3311months, it was thousands and thousands of trucks keeping the3312Denver metro area going in the dead of winter. We have talked,3313obviously, about the--you know, the wear and tear that that has3314on the roadway and traffic safety when you have that massive3315increase of vehicles.3316    But I want to make sure that the emissions component of3317that isn't lost when we are talking about the climate and the3318fact that pipelines are, again, one of the lowest-emission3319sources--ways of moving some of this energy around. They3320alleviate that critical demand on our electrical infrastructure3321because backfilling, you know, in my area, all of the heat that3322comes from natural gas combustion, which is what heats a lot of3323homes in my area, backfilling that with electrical demand is3324incredibly difficult and challenging and costly to a lot of our3325consumers in Colorado.3326    We have, unfortunately, seen a first-in-the-Nation3327mandated--a so-called beneficial electrification plan for a3328major utility in Colorado mandating that, even though they are3329not an electrical provider--they do natural gas distribution to3330customers--they have to have this so-called beneficial3331electrical plan, which is raising costs for consumers by3332dropping those heavyhanded mandates on consumers who want3333energy choice and want to be able to choose what works best for3334them, their family, and their budget.3335    So my first question will be to Mr. Moriarty. Can you just3336talk a little bit about the impact to consumers and to3337consumers' pocketbooks from that utility perspective with the3338current program that we have of making sure that our pipelines3339are regulated, that, as we have heard, the safest way to move3340this energy around, but can we--can you talk a little bit about3341the impact to the customers if we were to take a different path3342and have more regulatory burden on pipelines?3343    Mr. Moriarty. Well, thank you for that question.3344    All the costs that go in to delivering energy are recovered3345from our customers through State commission rate proceedings.3346One way that we have avoided higher costs is to construct LNG3347storage facilities to meet peak day demand.3348    So you were talking about freeze-offs. We would have an LNG3349storage facility that would be available. We have one in3350Florida, as well as one now we are building on Delmarva.3351    Mr. Evans. Yes, thank you for that. And then the next3352question will be to Mr. Black.3353    Obviously, pipeline safety, top of mind for everybody. We3354have talked a lot about it. And so I just want this to be our--3355I think our final thought for this hearing here. We need an3356empowered entity to step up and take action against bad actors3357that put the public safety at risk. And so that is why I was3358glad to see that PHMSA announced revisions to its pipeline3359safety enforcement actions last month to improve transparency3360and fairness.3361    And so can you just comment on those changes, how they3362alter the enforcement dynamics for operators?3363    And just talk a little bit about the evidentiary record3364process, as well.3365    Mr. Black. Congress has recognized there are failings in3366how PHMSA has managed its administrative enforcement program.3367In the 2020 PIPES Act, Congress mandated that PHMSA improve its3368procedures, including making the case file available to a3369respondent in a case. Then PHMSA in the last administration3370failed to do that. It happened episodically sometimes, not3371others, and it wasn't really codified in regulations.3372    And so PHMSA has--it now in the last month, as you say,3373improved that. It is a level playing field, and that is all3374pipeline operators are asking for--due process when PHMSA3375exerts its administrative enforcement program--because pipeline3376operators know that PHMSA needs to be active and deter unsafe3377operations, and give Congress and the American public3378confidence that they are on that case, making sure that we have3379a safe network.3380    Mr. Evans. Well, with our final 24 seconds, I guess I will3381just close with I think we have heard safety is top of mind in3382this space. We have that record of safety. We have that record3383of being responsible toward the climate, because this is one of3384the lowest-emission ways to move energy around. It is cost3385effective for consumers. And then, in my district, this3386provides high-quality jobs for a high-quality workforce that3387maintain these pipelines.3388    And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.3389    Mr. Latta. Right on the button. Thank you very much.3390    Seeing no further Members wishing to be recognized to ask3391questions to our witnesses, I want to thank you all for3392appearing before us for today.3393    Members have additional written questions that may be for3394you, and I will remind Members that they have 10 business days3395to submit additional questions for the record, and I ask that3396the witness do their best to submit their response within 103397business days upon the receipt of the questions.3398    I ask unanimous consent to insert in the record the3399documents included on the staff hearing documents list.3400    And without objection, that is so ordered.3401    [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]3402    Mr. Latta. And again I want to thank our witnesses.3403    And Mr. Black, welcome back, having been a former staffer3404here on the committee.3405    Also, this is the last hearing that we will have in this3406room until it is our--I guess we might say worked on. We have3407had a little bit of issues in this room through the years, but3408we really appreciate you being here.3409    Without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned.3410    [Whereupon, at 1:22 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]3411    [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]3412    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]34133414                            [all]