Review - S 2980 Introduced – Composite Pipes for H2 Pipelines

Earlier this month Sen Moran (R,KS) introduced S 2980, the Innovative and Safe Hydrogen Transportation Act. This bill would require DOT to “complete a study assessing the potential and existing use of pipelines constructed with composite materials to safely transport hydrogen and hydrogen blended with natural gas.” No funding is authorized by this legislation.

S 2980 is essentially the same as HR 6510, the Hydrogen Safety and Environmental Responsibility Act, that was introduced in the House by Rep Molinaro (R,NY) in November 2023. No further action was taken on that bill in the House in the 118th Congress. Additionally, a very similar version of this language was included in HR 6494, the PIPES Act of 2023. Section 14 of that bill would require the same study, except it would give DOT 24 months to complete the study instead of the 18 months provided in this bill. That bill was ordered reported favorably by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in June of 2023. The Committee Report and a reported version of the bill were published, but no further action was taken on the bill in the 118^th Congress.

Moving Forward

Moran is a member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee to which this bill was assigned for consideration. This means that there may be sufficient influence to see the bill considered in Committee. While the bill does include a regulatory requirement (generally an anathema for Republicans), this is a permissive regulatory requirement so this may avoid Republican opposition. I expect that there will be bipartisan support for this bill. That should be sufficient in Committee, but this bill is not politically important enough to allow for consideration by the full Senate under regular order. I suspect that there will be enough regulatory resentment and/or alternative-fuel opposition to prevent this bill from being approved under the Senate’s unanimous consent process.

Commentary

The requirement for this study in the bill is pro forma in nature. The heart of this bill is the requirement in §2(e) for DOT to move forward with a rulemaking “to allow for the use of composite materials for pipeline transportation of hydrogen and hydrogen blended with natural gas.” This presupposes that the study would find that such composite use would be safe.

The interest in composite materials in this bill is because hydrogen gas is very reactive with most metals used in pipeline construction. This results in an increase in brittleness of the metal and a decrease in the strength of the pipeline. The composite material can be either a high-strength plastic pipe or a plastic lining to a conventional metal pipe.

 

For more information on the provisions of this bill, see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/s-2980-introduced-composite-pipes - subscription required.

Review - HR 7655 Introduced – Pipeline Safety

Back in March, Rep Duncan (R,SC) introduced HR 7655, the Pipeline Safety, Modernization, and Expansion Act of 2024. This bill provides for the reauthorization of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA) Pipeline Safety Regulations (PSR). This bill is similar to HR 6494, the PIPES Act, which was introduced by Rep Graves (R,MO) and reported favorably by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Topics of potential interest here include:

§10. Strengthening penalties for pipeline safety violations.

§12. Maximum allowable operating pressure.

§14. Pipeline safety voluntary information-sharing system.

§18. Regulatory updates.

§19. Class location changes

Committee Action

On March 20^th, 2024, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a markup hearing that included consideration of this bill. The bill was amended (the current record does not show which amendments were approved) and then approved by a vote of 27 to 18 (which sounds like a party-line vote, but again no data is available).

Moving Forward

Typically, once a committee orders a bill reported, the publication of that report enables the bill to be considered by the full House. With split committee support like the 27 to 18 vote indicates, the bill would not be considered for consideration under the suspension of the rules process because such bills require a supermajority for passage. So, this bill would have to be considered under regular order. While ‘regular order’ in the House is less complicated than in the Senate, it still requires a level of political importance, that probably cannot be ascribed to this bill.

But this is not a typical situation. The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is the committee to which this bill was assigned for primary consideration. Until that Committee takes action on this bill, it will not proceed to the floor (okay, the Chair of the TI Committee could give permission for it to proceed without that Committee’s action, but that ain’t gonna happen, Chair prerogatives are too important).

Commentary

This bill was crafted by the Energy and Commerce Committee staff because the committee leadership was not satisfied with one or more provisions of the HR 6494, the PIPES Act, which was offered by the Chair of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. That bill was ordered reported back in December of 2023. Energy and Commerce was assigned secondary consideration on the PIPES Act bill, so that bill is also tied up waiting for EC’s consent to move that bill to the floor.

Review - HR 6494 Introduced – 2023 PIPES Act

Back in November, Rep Graves (R,MO) introduced HR 6494, the Promoting Innovation in Pipeline Efficiency and Safety (PIPES) Act of 2023. This is the periodic update of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration’s (PHMSA’s) Pipeline Safety Regulation (PSR). The bill authorizes spending for PSR operations.

Topics of potential interest here include:

Sec. 5. Regulatory updates.

Sec. 14. Study on composite materials for pipelines.

Sec. 21. Penalty for causing a defect in or disrupting operation of pipeline infrastructure.

Sec. 24. Pipeline safety voluntary information-sharing system.

Sec. 25. Carbon dioxide pipelines.

Sec. 29. Disclosure of safety information assessment.

Sec. 31. Report assessing the costs of pipeline failures.

Sec. 32. Study on localized emergency alert system for pipeline facilities incidents.

Moving Forward

Graves is the Chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to which this bill was assigned for consideration. This bill was crafted by the Committee staff and has bipartisan support, as well as support from industry.

On December 6^th, 2023, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee held a markup hearing that included HR 6494. Substitute language was offered and was adopted by a voice vote. The substitute language did not change the listed sections and only made relatively minor changes to the sections discussed above.

Once the Committee’s report on the bill is published, it will be cleared for consideration by the full House. I suspect that the bill will be considered under the suspension of the rules process.

 

For more details about this legislation, see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/hr-6494-introduced - subscription required.

Review – HR 6510 Introduced – Composite Pipes for Hydrogen Pipelines

Last month, Rep Molinaro (R,NY) introduced HR 6510, the Hydrogen Safety and Environmental Responsibility Act. This bill would require DOT to “complete a study assessing the potential and existing use of pipelines constructed with composite materials to safely transport hydrogen and hydrogen blended with natural gas.” No funding is authorized by this legislation.

Moving Forward

Both Molinaro and his sole cosponsor {Rep Allred (D,TX)} are members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to which this bill was assigned for primary consideration. This typically means that there could be sufficient influence to see this bill considered in Committee. There may be some objections to this bill from pipeline safety advocates, but I do not expect that there would be sufficient opposition to block passage in Committee. I suspect that there would be enough bipartisan support for this bill to move to the floor of the House under the suspension of the rules process.

Because there is similar language in HR 6494, there will be no action on this bill while the larger PIPES Act is pending consideration. This bill will move forward, only if HR 6494 fails (unlikely) or the composite pipe study requirement is removed from the final version of the bill.

Commentary

The interest in composite materials in this bill is due to the fact that hydrogen gas is very reactive with most metals used in pipeline construction. This results in an increase in brittleness of the metal and a decrease in the strength of the pipeline. The composite material can be either a high-strength plastic pipe or a plastic lining to a conventional metal pipe.

 

For more details about the provisions of this bill, see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/hr-6510-introduced - subscription required.

PIPES Act 2023 Markup – 12-6-23

This afternoon the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee announced that they would hold a full Committee markup hear on Wednesday. Only three bills will be considered; of specific interest here will be HR 6494, the Promoting Innovation in Pipeline Efficiency and Safety (PIPES) Act of 2023. This bill is the periodic reauthorization of PHMSA’s pipeline safety program and regulations (PSR).

The GPO has not yet published the official version of the bill, but the today’s meeting notice includes a link to a committee print of the bill as well as an amendment in the nature of a substitute (ANS). I have not yet had a chance to do a detailed review of the two versions, but just looking at the Table of Contents for the two versions shows the same 32 section names in each, so any differences will be down in the weeds.

This is not quite a ‘must pass bill’, PHMSA’s pipeline program is not going to fold if this bill (or some version of an authorization bill) does not pass. But these PIPES bills provide a way for Congress to keep their collective thumbs on pipeline matters.

Interestingly, the other two bills (HR 6276 and HR 6278, both government-building management bills) have been the subject of a markup hearing on November 11^th, but consideration of the two bills was postponed at that time. This typically means that there are some significant disagreements about provisions of the bill that still need to be worked out. 

Bills Introduced – 11-29-23

Yesterday, with both the House and Senate in session, there were 35 bills introduced. Four of those bills will receive additional attention in this blog:

HR 6494 To amend title 49, United States Code, to provide enhanced safety in pipeline transportation, and for other purposes. Graves, Sam [Rep.-R-MO-6] 

HR 6496 To require the Administrator of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to apply the final rule relating to valve installation and minimum rupture detection standards to Type A gas gathering lines, and for other purposes. Carbajal, Salud O. [Rep.-D-CA-24]

HR 6509 To amend title 49, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Transportation to establish a confidential voluntary information-sharing system to encourage the sharing of pipeline safety data, and for other purposes. Molinaro, Marcus J. [Rep.-R-NY-19]

HR 6510 To direct the Secretary of Transportation to study certain composite material pipelines, and for other purposes. Molinaro, Marcus J. [Rep.-R-NY-19]

It looks like Graves, Chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, has introduced the latest PHMSA pipeline safety reauthorization bill and two committee members had concerns that were not addressed in that bill.