As I noted earlier Rep. Rangel (D,NY) introduced HR
4338, the Pipeline Modernization and Consumer Protection Act. The bill is
intended to address the issue of aging pipeline infrastructure and the hazards
associated with leaks and failures associated with the old pipes.
Findings
Section 2(a) of the bill outlines the reasons that the
legislation is necessary. It points out that current Federal regulations do not
address minor leaks from interstate pipelines unless they present “an existing
or probable hazard to persons or property and require immediate repair” {§2(a)(1)}.
The author also notes that the cumulative value of these minor leaks is paid
for by the pipeline customers.
The findings section of the bill also reports that the aging
pipeline infrastructure is more prone to catastrophic failure and points to a
number of recent incidents involving old distribution pipeline leaks. It goes
on to note that the government regulated rate structures for these pipelines
provide disincentives to replacing the failure prone pipelines until they
actually fail. Some government mandated and supported pipeline replacement
measures are beginning to reverse this trend and are to be encouraged.
New Pipeline
Replacement Program
This bill would amend the pipeline safety rules by amending 49
USC Chapter 601 by adding a new section; §60112A, Replacement programs for high-risk natural gas pipelines. It would
require gas pipeline operators to, as part of the pipeline integrity management
requirements of §60109,
to “accelerate the repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of gas piping or
equipment” {§60112A(b)} that is leaking or presents a high risk of leaking due
to age, poor construction materials, outdated construction practices or lack of
maintenance.
The bill would require State regulatory authorities and each
unregulated gas utility, as part of this program, to consider {§60112A(c)(1)}:
● Developing prioritized timelines
to repair all leaks based on the severity of the leak;
● Adopting a cost-recovery program;
● Adopting a standard definition
and methodology for calculating and reporting unaccounted-for gas;
● Adopting limits on cost recovery
for lost and unaccounted-for gas; and
● Requiring the use of best
available technology to detect gas leaks.
Guidelines for
Identifying High-Risk Pipeline Infrastructure
Section 2(c) would require the PHMSA Administrator, within a
year of the adoption of the legislation, to issue “non-binding guidelines
identifying best practices under section” {§2(c)(1)} described above. The
preparation of those guidelines will take into account existing efforts by
various State regulatory agencies that have already attempted to address the
issue. The guidelines would be required to be updated every 7 years.
Data Standardization
Section 3 of the bill would require the PHMSA Administrator
to establish and publish forms that “adopt a standard definition and
methodology for calculating and reporting unaccounted-for gas”
{§3(a)}. This would be required to be completed within one
year of the adoption of this legislation.
Moving Forward
This looks like a fairly reasonable bill that should not
bring widespread opposition. Unfortunately, since it was introduced by Rep.
Rangel, it has a poor chance of being actively considered in Committee and even
less of making it to the floor of the House. If the New York Democrat can
convince Rep. Shuster (R,PA), the Chair of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee, to take up the bill, it could probably pass in both
the House and Senate.
No comments:
Post a Comment