PIPES Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Graves, Sam [R-MO-6]
- Committees
- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 17, 2025
Bottom line
The PIPES Act of 2025 modernizes and reauthorizes federal pipeline safety laws, integrating carbon dioxide pipelines into the regulatory structure, boosting funding, and aiming to improve transparency and data sharing across the industry.
What it actually does
This bill, known as the PIPES Act of 2025, reauthorizes and enhances federal pipeline safety programs under Title 49, United States Code. It significantly expands the regulatory framework to explicitly include carbon dioxide pipelines, increases appropriations for various safety initiatives, mandates improvements in regulatory transparency and efficiency, and establishes a new voluntary information-sharing system for pipeline safety data. The bill also directs several studies on emerging pipeline technologies and hazards, and strengthens criminal penalties for intentional damage to pipeline infrastructure.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill is crucial for updating pipeline safety regulations to address evolving infrastructure, particularly the growing network of carbon dioxide pipelines, and for ensuring PHMSA has the necessary resources and tools to protect communities and the environment. They emphasize that the bill promotes innovation, enhances transparency, and fosters a proactive safety culture through data sharing and improved regulatory processes.
Opponents contend
While the bill has bipartisan sponsorship, potential critics might raise concerns that some provisions, such as those streamlining special permits or increasing confidentiality in data sharing, could inadvertently reduce regulatory scrutiny or public accountability. Others might argue that the proposed funding levels or staffing increases are either insufficient or excessive, or that certain mandates could impose undue burdens on operators.
The bill is moderately long and contains numerous technical amendments and directives, requiring dedicated time to understand its full scope and implications, which may exceed the time typically allotted for a cursory review.
Sec. 2
Reauthorization of Appropriations for Pipeline Safety Programs
This section reauthorizes and increases funding for various federal pipeline safety programs for fiscal years 2026 through 2029. It allocates funds for gas and hazardous liquid pipeline safety, underground natural gas storage, one-call notification programs, emergency response grants, and community information grants. Notably, it establishes new grants for publicly owned natural gas distribution systems to replace high-risk infrastructure, with $150 million authorized annually for FY2027-2029.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that these reauthorizations are essential to ensure PHMSA has the necessary resources to carry out its safety mission, fund critical state programs, and support infrastructure upgrades that enhance public safety and reduce environmental risks.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against reauthorizing pipeline safety programs, though debates may occur over specific funding levels or allocations.
Tradeoffs
Balancing the need for robust federal oversight and state support with fiscal responsibility and the overall federal budget.
Sec. 3, Sec. 25
Comprehensive Regulatory Framework for Carbon Dioxide Pipelines
This bill extensively amends Title 49 to explicitly integrate carbon dioxide (CO2) pipelines into the federal pipeline safety regulatory framework. It defines CO2 pipelines, mandates PHMSA to prescribe safety standards for CO2 transportation and incidental storage, and requires operators to use vapor dispersion modeling to identify high consequence areas. The bill extends existing regulations for state safety programs, grants, inspections, integrity management, public education, and criminal penalties to cover CO2 pipelines, establishing a comprehensive oversight regime for this emerging infrastructure.
Sec. 4
PHMSA Workforce Expansion and Report
This section authorizes the Administrator of PHMSA to increase the number of full-time equivalent employees in the Office of Pipeline Safety by up to 30 positions. These new hires are specifically for individuals with advanced engineering, scientific, or other technical expertise to aid in developing and implementing pipeline safety policies and regulations. A report to Congress is required within one year detailing implementation progress, recruitment challenges, and staffing needs.
Sec. 5
Mandate Tracking and Transparency for Rulemaking
This provision requires the Secretary of Transportation to publish monthly updates on a publicly available website regarding the status of all outstanding pipeline safety rulemaking mandates from previous Acts (2011, 2016, 2020) and this Act. These updates must detail work plans, timelines, staff allocations, resource constraints, and the review status within the Department of Transportation and the Office of Management and Budget. Congress must also be notified upon the publication of any final rule.
Sec. 6
Updating and Accessibility of Incorporated Industry Standards
This section mandates the Secretary to review and update incorporated industry standards at least every four years, or upon petition. It grants discretion to decline standards inconsistent with law or improperly influenced. A public list of all considered standards, including reasons for non-adoption, must be maintained and submitted to Congress. Crucially, it requires that any industry standards incorporated by reference into federal regulations must be made available free of charge for viewing on a publicly available website by the developing entity.
Sec. 18
Enhanced State One-Call Programs and Damage Prevention
This section amends the criteria for federal grants to states for damage prevention programs, requiring consideration of the adoption of 'leading practices' for one-call programs. These practices include identifying ticket size/scope, restricting ticket longevity, limiting exemptions, specifying tolerance zones, and requiring positive response and white lining. It also mandates new data reporting requirements for states on underground facility damages and requires the Secretary to report to Congress on implementation and recommendations for reducing incidents.
Sec. 21
Criminal Penalties for Intentional Pipeline Damage or Disruption
This section amends Title 49 to establish new criminal penalties, including fines under Title 18 and imprisonment for up to 10 years, for individuals who knowingly and willfully cause a defect in pipeline components (like pipes, pumps, compressors, or valves) intended for use in a pipeline facility, or disrupt pipeline operation through unauthorized valve manipulation. This applies to components 'in the possession of a pipeline operator,' covering items in transit, at staging sites, or at construction sites.
Sec. 24
Establishment of a Voluntary Information-Sharing System (VIS)
This section establishes a confidential, voluntary information-sharing system (VIS) to improve pipeline safety by encouraging the sharing of de-identified safety data, lessons learned, and remediation measures across the industry. The VIS will be governed by a board of diverse stakeholders, managed by PHMSA, and utilize a Third-Party Data Manager. It includes strong confidentiality protections, exempting non-public information from FOIA and discovery in litigation, with specific exceptions for criminal violations or information otherwise required to be reported.
Sec. 32
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) Reconfirmation Flexibility
This section provides temporary relief from PHMSA's requirement for natural gas transmission pipeline operators to reconfirm Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) if prior testing, documented in contemporaneous records, confirms material strength to sufficient minimum pressure. It establishes a Working Group to recommend criteria for such prior testing within 180 days and mandates a subsequent rulemaking to revise MAOP reconfirmation regulations based on the Working Group's report.
This section re-designates numerous existing definitions in Title 49, United States Code, and inserts new definitions for 'carbon dioxide,' 'carbon dioxide pipeline facility,' 'de-identified,' 'interstate carbon dioxide pipeline facility,' 'intrastate carbon dioxide pipeline facility,' 'non-public pipeline safety data and information,' 'public information,' 'transporting carbon dioxide,' and 'Tribal.' The re-designations are extensive, shifting the numerical order of many established terms.
Sec. 3(6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for updating and expanding definitions within an existing statutory framework, though the sheer volume of re-designations makes it complex.
Case for: Proponents argue that clearly defining these terms, especially for carbon dioxide, is fundamental to establishing a comprehensive and legally sound regulatory framework for new pipeline infrastructure and data sharing initiatives.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against the technical act of defining terms, though the implications of the new definitions (e.g., for CO2 pipelines) could be debated.
Estimated impact: Broad impact on the legal and regulatory interpretation of pipeline safety laws, extending federal oversight to new areas.
This section makes a single, concise amendment to Section 60122(a)(1) of Title 49, United States Code, increasing the maximum civil penalty for pipeline safety violations from '$2,000,000' to '$3,412,000'.
Sec. 22
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for updating statutory penalty amounts, often done with a simple numerical change.
Case for: Proponents argue that increasing civil penalties provides a stronger deterrent against safety violations, encouraging operators to prioritize compliance and invest in safety measures to avoid significant financial repercussions.
Case against: Some industry groups might argue that excessively high penalties could be disproportionate for certain violations or create an overly punitive regulatory environment, potentially hindering innovation or diverting resources from other safety investments.
Estimated impact: Increases the financial risk for pipeline operators found in violation of safety regulations by over 70%.
This provision amends Section 60117(b)(1) of Title 49, United States Code, to allow respondents in a notice of probable violation enforcement matter an opportunity for a formal hearing on the record conducted by an administrative law judge (ALJ). This right applies if the proposed civil penalty is at least $125,000, or if the respondent can reasonably show the cost of the proposed compliance action will exceed $125,000.
Sec. 26(a)(3)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for modifying administrative process details, often placed within existing statutory sections governing those processes.
Case for: Proponents argue that this provision enhances due process for pipeline operators facing significant penalties or compliance costs, ensuring a more formal and impartial review of complex enforcement matters by an administrative law judge.
Case against: Some might argue that introducing a formal ALJ hearing option for more cases could lengthen the enforcement process, increase administrative burdens for PHMSA, and potentially delay the resolution of safety issues.
Estimated impact: Provides a new avenue for formal dispute resolution in significant pipeline safety enforcement cases, potentially altering the speed and outcome of such actions.