(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)
107th Congress Rept. 107-475
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 1
ENERGY PIPELINE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION ACT
May 16, 2002.--Ordered to be printed
Mr. Boehlert, from the Committee on Science, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 3929]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Science, to whom was referred the bill (H.R.
3929) to provide for the establishment of a cooperative Federal
research, development, and demonstration program to ensure the
integrity of pipeline facilities, and for other purposes,
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
II. Purpose of the Bill.............................................4
III. Background and Need for the Legislation.........................4
IV. Summary of Hearing..............................................5
V. Committee Actions...............................................6
VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill.........................7
VII. Section-By-Section Analysis (By Title and Section)..............7
VIII. Committee Views.................................................8
IX. Cost Estimate..................................................11
X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate......................11
XI. Compliance with Public Law 104-4 (Unfunded Mandates)...........12
XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations...............12
XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives..........12
XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement.............................12
XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement...........................12
XVI. Congressional Accountability Act...............................13
XVII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law.........13
XVIII.Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, As Reported..........13
XIX. Committee Recommendations......................................13
XX. Proceedings of Full Committee Markup...........................13
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Energy Pipeline Research, Development,
and Demonstration Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that--
(1) energy pipelines are a key component of the energy
infrastructure of the United States;
(2) pipelines can become more susceptible to failure with
(3) energy pipelines with unprotected rights-of-way and
associated above-ground facilities are vulnerable to terrorist
attacks and other disruptions and raise safety concerns;
(4) interruptions in service on major pipelines, whether a
result of pipeline failure or purposeful action, can have
enormous consequences for the economy and security of the
(5) new energy sources such as hydrogen will require a new
generation of pipelines; and
(6) a more coordinated research, development, demonstration,
and standardization program is needed to ensure the use of
existing technologies and the development of new technologies
to increase the safety and security of these critical
SEC. 3. PIPELINE INTEGRITY RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION.
(a) Establishment of Cooperative Program.--
(1) In general.--The heads of the participating agencies
shall develop and implement a program of research, development,
demonstration, and standardization to ensure the integrity of
energy pipelines and next-generation pipelines.
(2) Elements.--The program shall include research,
development, demonstration, and standardization activities
(A) materials inspection;
(B) stress and fracture analysis, detection of
cracks, corrosion, abrasion, and other abnormalities
inside pipelines that lead to pipeline failure, and
development of new equipment or technologies that are
inserted into pipelines to detect anomalies;
(C) internal inspection and leak detection
technologies, including detection of leaks at very low
(D) methods of analyzing content of pipeline
(E) pipeline security, including improving the real-
time surveillance of pipeline rights-of-way, developing
tools for evaluating and enhancing pipeline security
and infrastructure, reducing natural, technological,
and terrorist threats, and protecting first response
units and persons near an incident;
(F) risk assessment methodology, including
vulnerability assessment and reduction of third-party
(G) communication, control, and information systems
(H) fire safety of pipelines;
(I) improved excavation, construction, and repair
(J) other elements the heads of the participating
agencies consider appropriate.
(3) Activities and capabilities report.--Not later than 6
months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
participating agencies shall transmit to the Congress a report
on the existing activities and capabilities of the
participating agencies, including the national laboratories.
The report shall include the results of a survey by the
participating agencies of any activities of other Federal
agencies that are relevant to or could supplement existing
research, development, demonstration, and standardization
activities under the program created under this section.
(b) Program Plan.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the participating agencies shall prepare
and transmit to Congress a 5-year program plan to guide
activities under this section. Such program plan shall be
submitted to the Pipeline Integrity Technical Advisory
Committee established under subsection (c) for review, and the
report to Congress shall include the comments of the Advisory
Committee. The 5-year program plan shall take into account
related activities of Federal agencies that are not
(2) Consultation.--In preparing the program plan, the
participating agencies shall consult with appropriate
representatives of State and local government and the private
sector, including companies owning energy pipelines and
developers of next-generation pipelines, to help establish
(3) Advice from other entities.--In preparing the program
plan, the participating agencies shall also seek the advice of
other Federal agencies, utilities, manufacturers, institutions
of higher learning, pipeline research institutions, national
laboratories, environmental organizations, pipeline safety
advocates, professional and technical societies, and any other
(c) Pipeline Integrity Technical Advisory Committee.--
(1) Establishment.--The participating agencies shall
establish and manage a Pipeline Integrity Technical Advisory
Committee (in this subsection referred to as the ``Advisory
Committee''). The Advisory Committee shall be established not
later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this
(2) Duties.--The Advisory Committee shall--
(A) advise the participating agencies on the
development and implementation of the program plan
prepared under subsection (b); and
(B) have a continuing role in evaluating the progress
and results of research, development, demonstration,
and standardization activities carried out under this
(A) Appointment.--The Advisory Committee shall be
(i) 3 members appointed by the Secretary of
(ii) 3 members appointed by the Secretary of
(iii) 3 members appointed by the Director of
the National Institute of Standards and
In making appointments, the participating agencies
shall seek recommendations from the National Academy of
(B) Qualifications.--Members appointed to the
Advisory Committee shall have experience or be
technically qualified, by training or knowledge, in the
operations of the pipeline industry, and have
experience in the research and development of pipeline
or related technologies.
(C) Compensation.--The members of the Advisory
Committee shall serve without compensation, but shall
receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, in accordance with sections 5702 and 5703
of title 5, United States Code.
(4) Meetings.--The Advisory Committee shall meet at least 4
times each year.
(5) Termination.--The Advisory Committee shall terminate 5
years after its establishment.
(d) Reports to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the participating
agencies shall each transmit to the Congress a report on the status and
results to date of the implementation of their portion of the program
plan prepared under subsection (b).
SEC. 4. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.
Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the participating agencies shall enter into a memorandum of
understanding detailing their respective responsibilities under this
Act, consistent with the activities and capabilities identified under
section 3(a)(3). Each of the participating agencies shall have the
primary responsibility for ensuring that the elements of the program
plan within its jurisdiction are implemented in accordance with this
Act. The Department of Transportation's responsibilities shall reflect
its expertise in pipeline inspection and information systems surety.
The Department of Energy's responsibilities shall reflect its expertise
in low-volume leak detection and surveillance technologies. The
National Institute of Standards and Technology's responsibilities shall
reflect its expertise in standards and materials research.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated--
(1) to the Secretary of Energy $10,000,000;
(2) to the Secretary of Transportation $5,000,000; and
(3) to the National Institute of Standards and Technology
for each of the fiscal years 2003 through 2007 for carrying out this
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act--
(1) the term ``energy pipeline'' means a pipeline system used
in the transmission or local distribution of natural gas
(including liquefied natural gas), crude oil, or refined
(2) the term ``next-generation pipeline'' means a
transmission or local distribution pipeline system designed to
transmit energy or energy-related products, in liquid or
gaseous form, other than energy pipelines;
(3) the term ``participating agencies'' means the Department
of Energy, the Department of Transportation, and the National
Institute of Standards and Technology; and
(4) the term ``pipeline'' means an energy pipeline or a next-
II. PURPOSE OF THE BILL
This bill authorizes cooperative Federal research,
development, and demonstration (RD&D;) programs to be conducted
by the Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Transportation
(DOT) and in the National Institute for Standards and
Technology (NIST) to ensure the integrity of energy pipelines.
This program will develop methods and technologies to help
prevent pipeline failures from all causes, including, but not
limited to accidental pipeline breaches and intentional
III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
There are approximately 2.1 million miles of pipelines in
the U.S. transporting natural gas, crude oil, petroleum and
other products. The DOT regulates these pipelines in
partnership with state regulators. States have regulatory
responsibility for intrastate pipelines, while the Federal
Government oversees the interstate pipeline system. Research
and Development (R&D; is critical to support the government's
regulatory mission and to assist industry's efforts to optimize
safety and improve performance and reliability of the nation's
pipelines. Currently, research on the safety and security of
the nation's gas and product pipelines is conducted by DOE,
which operates on general revenue funding, and DOT, through the
Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), which
collects industry user fees for R&D.; RSPA's research efforts
are an essential part of DOT's regulatory mission, but some
question whether RSPA's research effort may be too focused on
pipeline regulatory goals. The programs authorized under this
Act at DOE, DOT and the new program to be established at NIST
are designed to supplement the fee-based research at RSPA and
to ensure that any existing or future research gaps are filled.
Pipeline integrity and safety are of critical importance to
the public, both to reduce injuries and fatalities from
pipeline failures and because of the importance of the products
carried--natural gas, liquid products and, increasingly,
hydrogen and other energy sources for the future. Pipeline
accidents over the last several years have caused injuries and
deaths around the country. Since September 11th, the fear of
accidents has been exacerbated by the fear of terrorism. In
many places pipelines carrying volatile materials are at or
near the surface and pass through densely populated areas.
These pipelines run along rights-of-way that are largely
unprotected and not under constant surveillance.
Pipeline breaches, whether accidents or intentional, pose a
danger to the public and to the environment. Incidents over the
past number of years have caused fatalities, including a large
accident at Carlsbad, New Mexico in August 2000 that killed 10
people; an explosion in Bellingham, Washington, in June 1999
that killed three; and an accident at South Riding, Virginia in
the summer of 1998 that killed one.
The loss of pipeline capacity in constrained markets can
also create energy shortages that have far-reaching economic
consequences. Pipeline accidents can cause price spikes or a
longer-term price rise. However, R&D; can help reduce incidents,
and ensure rapid recovery to minimize risks.
Pipeline Safety reauthorization has been taken up several
times in the past several years. The Senate passed
comprehensive pipeline safety legislation by voice vote in
September of 2000 but the House did not take up the bill. On
February 13, 2001, the Senate again passed comprehensive
legislation, S. 235, this time by a vote of 98 to 0. Several
comprehensive pipeline safety bills have been introduced in the
House, including H.R. 144 (by Mr. Dingell and Mr. Oberstar),
H.R. 459 (by Mr. Larson), H.R. 2749 (by Ms. Dunn) and H.R. 3609
(by Mr. Tauzin and Mr. Young). These bills cover a wide range
of pipeline safety issues, including the qualification and
training of pipeline safety personnel, pipeline integrity
inspection, security at pipeline facilities, enforcement of
pipeline safety requirements, public access to information
about pipelines, state oversight, coordinated environmental
review of pipeline projects, the use of cost-benefit analysis
in regulatory decision-making, and the conduct of Federal
pipeline safety research and development.
On March 12, 2002, Mr. Hall of Texas introduced H.R. 3929,
the Energy Pipeline Research, Development, and Demonstration
Act, along with Mr. Smith of Texas. The Committee on Science
marked up H.R. 3929 on March 20th. The legislation will address
some of the research needs posed by the Nation's aging and
vulnerable pipeline infrastructure and the need for a new
generation of pipelines to transport products in the future.
The bill sets out a RD&D; mission for the DOE, DOT and NIST.
Both DOE and DOT have existing pipeline safety research
programs, but the Administration proposes to transfer DOE's
research program functions to DOT in FY 2003. The DOE program
would be preserved under provisions contained in H.R. 3929. In
addition, the bill authorizes a research program to be
undertaken by NIST to develop pipeline standards. NIST's
research capabilities in materials research related to pipeline
safety date back as far as World War II when NIST assisted the
Navy in research on metal fatigue. Over the years, NIST has
worked with both the American Gas Association and the American
Petroleum Institute by making precise measurements of the flow
rates of pipeline contents. In addition, NIST has some valuable
experience in connection with the National Earthquake Hazards
Research Program that will allow it to lend a variety of
relevant expertise to efforts to improve pipeline safety.
IV. SUMMARY OF HEARING
On March 13, 2002, the Subcommittee on Energy of the House
Committee on Science held a hearing titled H.R. 3929: Energy
Pipeline Research, Development, and Demonstration Act. This
hearing examined the Committee's legislation, H.R. 3929
designed to advance the science needed to protect the Nation's
critical pipeline infrastructure from attack or failure. The
Committee's legislation will increase R&D; efforts to improve
surveillance, security, fault detection (including difficult-
to-detect low-level leaks), and to measure the robustness of
pipeline materials. It is hoped that such research can reduce
repair and recovery times after a pipeline failure.
Witnessesincluded pipeline industry stakeholders who testified on
provisions included in H.R. 3939 and on how a government/industry
pipeline safety research partnership will best improve pipeline safety.
Mr. Terry Boss, Vice President of Environment, Safety and
Operations for the Interstate Natural Gas Association of
America testified on the importance of pipeline research and
the different funding mechanisms employed to finance these
efforts. He indicated that new funding mechanisms need to be
put in place to make up for the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) R&D; surcharge which expires in 2004. The FERC
surcharge-funded research program has collected as much as $212
million a year. He also raised some questions about NIST's role
in pipeline safety R&D; and urged the Committee to give a higher
priority to restoring DOE's funding.
Mr. Tim Felt, the President of the Explorer Pipeline
Corporation appeared on behalf of the Association of Oil Pipe
Lines. He testified that the DOT's Office of Pipeline Safety
has the longest experience in pipeline safety R&D; and perhaps
the best understanding of the needs of the regulated community.
He felt that DOE had an important R&D; role, since pipeline
safety is such an important public and environmental priority,
and DOE has access to general revenue funds. He discussed
technologies that DOE has developed that may be useful for
pipeline operators. Finally, he advised the committee to name a
lead agency to minimize disagreement among the agencies about
the roles and functions of each in the overall R&D; program
authorized by H.R. 3929.
Dr. Nirmal Chatterjee, Vice President of Environmental,
Health and Safety and Corporate Engineering for Air Products
and Chemicals, Inc. testified that hydrogen pipelines operate
in a different manner from natural gas and products pipelines
and, as such, will require substantially different R&D; efforts.
These differences include enhanced leak flow detection,
automated shut off valves and greater variability in pipeline
diameter. He predicted that most hydrogen production would be
local and said that he did not foresee the need for an
extensive hydrogen pipeline system in the next 10-20 years.
Mr. Stan Wise, a Commissioner with the Georgia Public
Service Commission, appeared on behalf of the National
Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC). His
testimony focused on a NARUC R&D; funding resolution that is not
a part of H.R. 3929. This mandatory funding scheme would
collect approximately $65 million in funding for pipeline and
storage R&D; programs and has the support of American Gas
Association (which represents mostly local distribution
V. Committee Actions
On March 12, 2002, Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall and
Mr. Lamar Smith of the Committee on Science introduced H.R.
3939, the Energy Pipeline Research, Development, and
Demonstration Act, a bill to direct the heads of the DOE, DOT,
and NIST to develop and implement a cooperative Federal
research, development, demonstration, and standardization
program to ensure the integrity of pipeline facilities. As
summarized above, the Subcommittee on Energy of the Committee
on Science heard testimony relevant to the programs authorized
in H.R. 3929 at a hearing on March 13, 2002. The Committee on
Science met to consider H.R. 3929 on March 20, 2002, and
entertained an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered
by Mr. Hall, Ranking Minority Member of the Committee on
Science, on behalf of himself and Mr. Smith of Texas. The
amendment, which was adopted by voice vote: (1) incorporates
some recommendations of witnesses at the March 13th hearing,
and written comments and consultations with other interested
parties; (2) clarifies that the RD&D; program includes advances
related to both traditional energy pipelines as well as ``next
generation'' pipelines. (Section 6 defines ``next-generation
pipelines'' to include any pipeline carrying energy or energy-
related products other than natural gas, crude oil or refined
petroleum products); and, (3) makes several changes to the
findings in Section 2 to clarify the scope of the bill and its
provisions. The motion to adopt the bill, as amended, was
agreed to by a voice vote. The motion to report the bill, as
amended, was agreed to by a voice vote.
VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill
To provide for the establishment of a cooperative Federal
RD&D; program to ensure the integrity and safety of pipelines
and related facilities through a coordinated Federal program of
pipeline safety RD&D;, and standardization program conducted by
the DOE, DOT and NIST (identified as ``the participating
agencies''). The bill:
Requires that the participating agencies provide
to Congress an analysis of their RD&D; and standardization
capabilities and activities within six months of enactment of
Requires that the participating agencies submit to
Congress within one year of enactment, a plan for RD&D; and
standardization efforts to be undertaken under this
Establishes a Pipeline Integrity Technical
Advisory Committee (PITAC).
Directs PITAC to review the plan and provide
ongoing assessments of the RD&D; and standardization efforts
authorized under the Act.
Calls upon the participating agencies to enter
into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) within 120 days of
enactment to outline research capabilities and responsibilities
for each of the three agencies.
Authorizes to be appropriated each fiscal year
(2002-2006): $10,000,000 to DOE; $5,000,000 to DOT; and
$5,000,000 to NIST. These funds are in addition to any other
fee-based funding used for pipeline research programs at DOT.
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis (By Title and Section)
Section 1. Short title
Subsection 1(a) cites the Act as the Energy Pipeline
Research, Development, and Demonstration Act, and subsection
1(b) contains the bill's table of contents.
Section 2. Findings
Section 2 contains the Committee's findings on the need for
Section 3. Pipeline integrity research, development, and demonstration
Requires DOE, DOT, and NIST to develop and implement an
RD&D; program focused on energy pipeline safety. Requires
participating agencies to submit a report of activities and
capabilities to Congress no later than six months after
enactment and a five-year program plan to the PITAC no later
than one year after enactment. The Act provides for
coordination among participating agencies, state and local
governments, and the pipeline industry with advice from a
number of outside entities in preparing the plan. Establishes
the PITAC to advise and evaluate the plan. The PITAC shall be
composed of nine members, three each appointed by DOE, DOT and
NIST under recommendations from the National Academy of
Sciences. PITAC members shall be qualified technically and
serve without compensation other than travel expenses. The
PITAC will meet four times each year and will be terminated
after five years. The participating agencies will submit annual
reports on the status of their portion of the program.
Section 4. Memorandum of understanding
Requires DOE, DOT and NIST to enter into a MOU detailing
their roles in this program. DOT's responsibilities shall
include pipeline inspection and information systems surety.
DOE's responsibilities shall include low-volume leak detection
and surveillance technologies. NIST's responsibilities shall
include standards and materials research.
Section 5. Authorization of appropriations
Authorizes to be appropriated each fiscal year (2002-2006):
$10,000,000 to DOE, $5,000,000 to DOT and $5,000,000 to NIST.
These funds are in addition to any other fee-based funding used
for pipeline research programs at DOT.
Section 6. Definitions
Defines ``participating agencies'' as the DOE, DOT and
VIII. COMMITTEE VIEWS
Section 2. Findings
Fire safety of pipelines, always a difficult problem,
becomes more difficult in pipelines that move methanol,
hydrogen, and other higher energy content fuels. Hydrogen is a
particularly hazardous fuel; it is extremely reactive and leads
to extremely high temperature fires. Both methanol and hydrogen
flames are not detectable to the human eye which complicates
both detection and fire fighting efforts, yet virtually no
research has been done on developing optimal strategies for
leak and fire detection. NIST's fire research division, which
has decades of experience in developing, verifying, and
utilizing fire measurements and methods of prediction is
uniquely situated to help fill these research gaps. NIST has
strong capabilities related to laboratory measurement of fire,
integrating research results into models, and conducting large-
scale fire experiments to demonstrate the use and value of the
Section 3. Pipeline integrity research, development, and demonstration
Section 3(a)(2)(B) contains language related to pipeline
degradation including cracks, corrosion, abrasion and other
abnormalities as well as stress and fractures, which can cause
a range of problems, including catastrophic failure. Detection
and analysis of problems before they become severe is essential
to the safe, efficient and economic operation of pipelines.
This section calls for an integrated research, development,
demonstration and standardization program to improve our
understanding of pipeline failure modes and stresses through
improved technologies and analytical techniques. This RD&D;
should include in-line inspection devices that can more
reliably detect features such as hard spots, stress corrosion
cracking, and other actual or potential points-of-failure and
should include ``next-generation'' pipelines which are
transmission pipelines other than oil and gas pipelines
carrying new forms of energy such as hydrogen. These programs
should take into account the unique characteristics of
different pipelines and seek appropriate solutions for the
different types of products, operating environments, physical
layout, pipeline pressures and maintenance duty cycles.
Section 3(a)(2)(C) calls for RD&D; on low-level pipeline
leaks, which are difficult to detect by conventional means and
are often a precursor to serious threats to health and
environmental safety. Detection of these small leaks requires
development of new, low-cost, high-confidence detection
technologies and techniques. Research is needed to develop
acoustic and fiber optic sensors, among others, to measure
these parameters on-line and in real time. These detection
methods must take into account the unique characteristics of
different pipelines and seek appropriate solutions for the
different types of products, operating environments, physical
layout, pipeline pressure and maintenance duty cycles.
The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has extensive
expertise in analytical technologies that could be employed for
monitoring the integrity of the flowing material, leaks, aging,
and other problems associated with pipelines. For example,
external leak detection and analysis of the material in the
pipeline could be accomplished with small, automated mass
spectrometers, similar to those designed for the Department of
Defense for chemical/biological threat agents. Microfabricated
mass spectrometers and ion-mobility spectrometers being
developed at ORNL are able to detect level concentrations of
gas-phase species down to parts-per-billion levels and could be
produced at low cost. Distributed arrays of such sensors would
allow continuous remote monitoring of pipeline integrity.
ORNL has expertise and unique facilities in materials
research, inspection, stress and fracture analysis, and the
detection of cracks. In one project focused on pipeline safety,
an experimentally based model was developed that gives insight
into the mechanisms involved when pipelines are hydrostatically
proof tested in the field. Use of this model could help avoid
the damage that sometimes results from such field testing. The
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) is developing two
technologies to ensure the integrity of pipelines in
refineries: optical fiber based acoustic monitoring for
analysis of cracking and corrosion; and optical-fiber-based
spectroscopy for leak detection.
Section 3(a)(2)(E) calls for development of improved
surveillance of pipeline rights-of-way. This improved
surveillance will be used to detect threats ranging from
accidental construction damage to deliberate attack. These
threats also consist of cyber threats to pipeline control and
monitoring, and supervisory control and data acquisition
RD&D; under Section 3(a)(2)(F) should include LBNL's
Exposure and Risk Analysis Group's world-recognized
capabilities in risk assessment methodology with particular
strengths in emissions-to-dose assessment, biokinetics, and
methods for addressing uncertainty and variability.
The purpose of the Activities and Capabilities Report
required under section 3(a)(3) is to gather information and
catalog expertise throughout the government and its
laboratories related or useful to the pipeline hazard reduction
RD&D; and standardization activities planned under this Act,
thereby creating a baseline on which to structure the program
plan required under 3(b). It is our hope that within six
months, the participating agencies will be able to develop a
clear picture of what is known and what is not known related to
both traditional and next generation pipelines and that this
knowledge will allow the plan to be developed in a way that
minimizes unnecessary overlap among agencies, alerts all
relevant agencies that this work will be undertaken, and
ensures that all relevant agencies integrate their research
planning so that this Act leads to the best possible use of the
program's limited resources.
The Committee intends that the appointees to PITAC under
Section 3(c) have training and experience that is relevant and
applicable to pipeline safety and security operations, not
necessarily ``hands-on'' experience in the operation of
Section 4. Memorandum of understanding
Development of the MOU under Section 4 should require the
participating agencies to coordinate in advance of carrying out
any other activities under the Act to learn what other agencies
bring to the program and to divide up responsibilities in a
manner that minimizes duplication and that makes the best use
of existing expertise. This section lists specific areas of
expertise for the DOT, the DOE, and NIST that are clearly
relevant to the work to be accomplished under the Act and which
should be included in the MOU. However, since each of the
agencies has far-ranging abilities, it is assumed that the MOU
will be far more exhaustive than the statutory language and
will list in each case more of the expertise that each agency
brings to this project. The Committee on Science of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate expect to be kept informed of the
progress towards development of the MOU and to be sent final
versions of the MOU as soon as it becomes available.
Section 6. Definitions
The term ``next-generation pipeline'' is meant to include
all foreseeable types of pipelines needed to carry alternative
liquid and gaseous fuels such as hydrogen and methanol, but is
not meant to include incremental improvements in crude oil,
natural gas, and refined petroleum product pipelines.
IX. COST ESTIMATE
A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of
the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to
the Committee on Science prior to the filing of this report and
is included in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule
XIII, clause 3(c)(3).
H.R. 3929 does contain new budget authority, credit
authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming
that the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R.
3929 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as
described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the
bill, which is contained in Section X of this report.
X. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, April 5, 2002.
Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3929, the Energy
Pipeline Research, Development, and Demonstration Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Rachel
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
H.R. 3929--Energy Pipeline Research, Development, and Demonstration Act
Summary: H.R. 3929 would direct the Department of Energy,
the Department of Transportation, and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology to develop a five-year program for
finding better ways to construct, inspect, and repair energy
pipelines; reduce threats to energy pipelines from terrorists
and the natural environment; and assess risks associated with
energy pipelines. The bill would authorize the appropriation of
$20 million a year over the 2003-2007 period for this new
CBO estimates that implementing this bill would cost $67
million over the 2003-2007 period, and another $33 million
after fiscal year 2007. Enacting H.R. 3929 would not affect
direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply.
H.R. 3929 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no cost on the budgets of state, local, or
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 3929 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 400
(transportation). For this estimate, CBO assumes enactment of
H.R. 3929 in fiscal year 2002 and appropriation of the
authorized amounts. Estimates of spending are based on
information from the Department of Energy and historical
spending patterns of similar programs.
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Authorization level........................................... 20 20 20 20 20
Estimated outlays............................................. 3 11 15 18 20
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 3929
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no cost on the budgets of
state, local, or tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Rachel Milberg; impact
on state, local, and tribal governments: Angela Seitz; impact
on the private sector: Jean Talarico.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
XI. Compliance With Public Law 104-4 (Unfunded Mandates)
H.R. 3929 contains no unfunded mandates.
xii. committee oversight findings and recommendations
The Committee on Science's oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
XIII. STATEMENT ON GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Pursuant to clause (3)(c)(4) of House Rule XIII, the goal
and objective of the bill is to authorize the DOT, DOE and NIST
to develop and implement an R&D; program focused on enhancing
energy pipeline safety.
XIV. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 3929.
XV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
Although DOT currently has two technical advisory
committees that provide advice on technical aspects of the
DOT's standard setting responsibilities, the functions of the
Pipeline Integrity Technical Advisory Committee (PITAC)
established by H.R. 3929 are not currently being nor could they
be performed by one or more agencies or by enlarging the
mandate of another existing advisory committee.
The Office of Pipeline Safety in DOT has two advisory
committees that have been mandated by legislation. The Natural
Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968 requires establishment of the
Technical Pipeline Safety Standards Committee (TPSSC), and the
Hazardous Liquid Safety Act of 1979 requires creation of the
Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Standards Committee
(THLPSSC). The primary purpose of these two existing Committees
is to review proposed pipeline safety standards for technical
feasibility, reasonableness, cost effectiveness and
practicability. The Committees also serve as a sounding board
for discussing pipeline safety policy issues as well as
legislative initiatives. The PITAC, established under section
3(c), on the other hand, would provide technical advice to the
three participating agencies on the development and
implementation of the RD&D; program and in evaluating the
program's progress and results.
XVI. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
The Committee finds that H.R. 3929 does not relate to the
terms and conditions of employment or access to public services
or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of
the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104-1).
XVII. STATEMENT ON PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW
This bill is not intended to preempt any state, local, or
xviii. changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported
This measure does not amend any existing Federal statute.
XIX. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
On March 20, 2002, a quorum being present, the Committee on
Science favorably reported H.R. 3929, Energy Pipeline Research,
Development, and Demonstration Act, by a voice vote, and
recommended its enactment.
XX. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP
PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 3929, ENERGY PIPELINE
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION ACT
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 20, 2002
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:40 a.m., in Room
2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sherwood L.
Boehlert [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Chairman Boehlert. The Committee on Science will be in
order. First of all, I would like to advise all members that
there is a sign-up sheet before each individual place,
reflecting the views and estimates, and we would like you to
read the Committee's views and estimates, and hopefully, you
will be inspired to sign the sheet indicating your approval.
With that, let us get moving.
The Committee on Science will be in order. Pursuant to
notice, the Committee on Science is meeting today to consider
the following measures. H.R. 2051, A Bill to Provide for the
Establishment of Regional Plant Genome and Gene Expression
Research and Development Centers. Thank you, Mr. Smith. H.R.
3389, the National Sea Grant Program Act Amendments of 2002,
and H.R. 3929, the Energy Pipeline Research, Development, and
I ask unanimous consent for the authority to recess the
Committee at any point, and without objection it is so ordered.
Mr. Hall will be making his way here to present his opening
remarks. Let me do mine.
The three bills we have before us this morning deal with
very different topics and come from three different
subcommittees, but they do have a few key aspects in common.
First, all three are bipartisan consensus bills. Once again,
the Committee's majority and minority staffs have worked in
tandem to draft the bills that advance proposals from members
on both sides of the aisle. This Committee continues to set an
example of working together that others would do well to
follow. Also, all three bills are designed to promote research
and development, especially, long-term research and development
that will help address critical societal problems.
H.R. 2051 was designed to help strengthen American
agriculture and alleviate malnutrition in the developing world.
H.R. 3389 will help protect the nation's coastal areas and
fisheries and combat invasive species. And H.R. 3929 will help
prevent pollution and pipeline explosions. These bills are not
funding research for the sake of research whether they deal
with abstruse matters of no concern to the rest of Congress or
to the rest of the country. The research advances that will
result from these measures will help improve the daily lives of
people here and around the world. Let me say just a little bit
more about each of these bills and then they will be described
more fully by their sponsors as we mark up each one.
H.R. 2051, offered by Chairman Nick Smith and Ranking
Minority Member Eddie Bernice Johnson, will create two new
programs on plant biotechnology at the National Science
Foundation. The bill offers a balanced approach to biotech
authorizing research not only to develop new genetic
engineering techniques and products, but also, to examine the
ecological and social consequences of bio-engineered plants.
H.R. 3389, offered by Chairman Vernon Ehlers and Ranking
Minority Member Jim Barcia, will reauthorize and reform the Sea
Grant Program, while keeping it within the National
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. We will have to
negotiate a final version of the bill with the Resources
Committee before it can come to the Floor, and we plan to push
in a strong and unified fashion for our version of this bill.
However, we will, as Dr. Ehlers has committed, find a way to
address the concerns Mr. Underwood has raised about the way the
Sea Grant Program deals with the Pacific Islands.
Finally, we will take up H.R. 3929, offered by Ranking
Minority Member Ralph Hall and Lamar Smith, which will ensure
that all the federal agencies with expertise in pipeline safety
are engaged in research in that important area. We will work
with the Energy and Commerce, and Transportation and
Infrastructure Committees to move our bill as part of a
comprehensive pipeline safety measure.
So we have much to accomplish today and we will do it in
the bipartisan fashion that has become the Committee's
hallmark. With that, the Chair recognizes Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, as usual, you have covered the
waterfront pretty well. I just want to say that I support these
three bills. We will have an amendment for the third bill, but
on H.R. 2051, I want to congratulate Nick Smith and Ranking
Democratic Member Eddie Bernice Johnson for their efforts on
it. And of course, on the Sea Grant Program, your bill, I
certainly support that and look forward to working with you,
and you have recognized Chairman Ehlers and Representative
Barcia. And on my bill, I will have an amendment of 3929 that
we will discuss when we have a little more time. With that,
thank you for doing a good job, and I yield back the balance of
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Ralph M. Hall
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee,
First of all I want to thank you for working with us to develop
this bill and bring it to the Full Committee for markup today. This
bill is the product of a close collaboration on both sides of the aisle
to produce legislation that will be of immense value to this Nation in
ensuring that the natural gas, crude oil and refined products pipelines
of this country are safer and more secure facilities as we move into
the 21st century. And we are taking the first steps toward addressing
the special considerations that need to be considered in the
development of what we call the next-generation pipelines--those that
will carry hydrogen, CO2 and perhaps other substances that
will be part of the energy infrastructure of the future.
Our thanks also go to our staffs for their hard work in preparing
the bill for our consideration today. The legislative process has
worked as it should--we held a legislative hearing and got some first-
rate testimony on what the appropriate federal role should be in
research and development. And we incorporated many of those
recommendations in the substitute to the bill, which I will offer
shortly. Other recommendations and suggestions will be reflected in the
report to accompany the bill.
These pipelines are an essential part of the Nation's energy
infrastructure. They are so affected with the public interest that
special efforts need to be taken now to make certain that new
technologies are developed or existing technologies adapted to make
certain that these facilities are as safe and secure as they can be--
and as soon as they can be.
The bill brings the considerable capabilities of the Department of
Energy (DOE) and its National Laboratories and the National Institute
of Standards and Technology (NIST) to bear in a much more prominent way
to provide solutions to the safety and security needs of the Nation's
pipelines. The bill provides considerable flexibility to the
participating agencies, the Department of Transportation, DOE and NIST,
to develop a research plan--one that will be reviewed by a Technical
Advisory Committee to ensure that the work being done is relevant and
Our intention is to merge this bill with the Pipeline Safety bill
introduced by Don Young and Billy Tauzin. We believe that the language
of this bill is very complementary and helpful to the larger bill, and
we look forward to working with them, and the other members of the
Transportation and Infrastructure and Energy and Commerce Committees in
getting their support for these provisions.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much. And let me tell
you, it is the Chair's intent to move with dispatch. These
bills have been looked at with the respective committee staffs.
They are very able and very professional staffs, so we don't
envision a long markup here. We have a hearing immediately
after with some very distinguished guests, and I know a number
of our colleagues have conflicting commitments. So without
objection, all members' opening statements will be placed in
the record at this point.
Chairman Boehlert. We will now consider H.R. 3929, the
Energy Pipeline Research, Development, and Demonstration Act. I
ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered as read and
open to amendment at any point. I ask the members to proceed
with the amendments in the order on the roster. Without
objection, so ordered.
[H.R. 3929 follows:]
Chairman Boehlert. The first amendment on the roster is an
amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Hall on
behalf of himself and Mr. Smith of Texas. The Clerk will report
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 3929, offered by Mr. Hall of
Texas and Mr. Smith of Texas.
Chairman Boehlert. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. I now recognize the
Ranking Member, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hall, for 5
minutes to explain the amendment.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and Members of the
Committee. The amendment we are offering today differs in
several points from the original. Thanks to a lot of valuable
feedback from the witnesses that you and that we together
selected to testify for us last week, we have learned several
things and made some changes, as much up-to-date changes as we
could. In the finding section, we looked to amplify and clarify
the scope and intent of the bill. For example, we removed some
limiting language and the bill now includes all ``energy''
pipelines in its scope. Actually, we put an additional
provision in the bill that defined energy pipelines as being
natural gas, and crude oil, and refined products. That is on
the last page, page 9, and includes LNG, and I think it is a
good amendment, and I hope it will be accepted.
In the events section, Section 3(a)(2), the substitute
further highlights specific technologies for preventing and
responding to pipeline failure, and we have noted the
importance of R&D;, and fire safety, and technology such as
smart pigs. You will see that in the write-up or in the report
language. These are simply instruments and packages that they
run through the pipelines to detect defects and to give other
information. It is a device that will detect the abnormalities
inside the pipe and outside. And likewise, we have enhanced the
security and surveillance provision to address the growing
concern of outside threats to our nation's pipeline
infrastructure. I think it is a good amendment.
In the activities and capabilities section, we have changed
the language some to ensure the agencies take into account
research that is done in other agencies and to adjust their
So finally, we have added three definitions for energy
pipeline, next generation pipeline, and pipeline and various
conforming languages changed to accommodate the definitions.
You can see the definitions if you need to at the end of the
bill there, simply enlarged. I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Is there any further discussion? If not,
the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor say aye.
Opposed, no. The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to.
[Amendment to H.R. 3929 follows:]
Chairman Boehlert. Are there any further amendments?
Hearing none, the question is on the bill H.R. 3929, the Energy
Pipeline Research, Development, and Demonstration Act. All in
favor will say aye. Opposed, no. In the opinion of the Chair,
the ayes have it. I will now recognize Mr. Hall for a motion.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee favorably
report H.R. 3929 as amended to the House with the
recommendation that the bill as amended do pass. Furthermore, I
move that the staff be instructed to prepare the legislative
report and make necessary technical and conforming changes, and
that the Chairman take all necessary steps to bring the bill
before the House for consideration sooner rather than later.
Chairman Boehlert. Any questions on the motion to report
the bill favorably? Those in favor of the motion will signify
by saying aye. Opposed, no. The ayes appear to have it, and the
bill is favorably reported. I move that members have two
subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental
minority or additional views on the measure. Without objection
so ordered. I move pursuant to Clause 1 of Rule 22 of the Rules
of the House of Representatives that the Committee authorize
the Chairman to offer such motions as may be necessary in the
House to go to conference with the Senate on the bill H.R. 3929
or a similar Senate bill. Without objection, so ordered.
That concludes the Committee markup.
[Whereupon, at 11:08 a.m., the Committee proceeded to other